9911796707
TMI Blog1995 (2) TMI 13X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in holding that the primary fact of the loss either due to embezzlement or for any other reason has not been established by the appellant even though the entries find a place in the regularly maintained books of account ? 3. Whether the Tribunal is right in holding that no evidence was produced by the appellant that embezzlement had taken place in the course of the business ? 4. Whether the Tribunal is legally correct in holding that embezzlement had not occurred in the year of account ? " The assessee is a public limited company. During the year of account, the assessee claimed a sum of Rs. 52,547 recorded in the balance-sheet as advances and deposits as deductions in working out the profit. According to the assessee, two items of Rs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . The Tribunal set aside the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and restored the order passed by the Income-tax Officer. It is the case of the assessee that inasmuch as the acquittal was granted on technical grounds and the assessee produced account books to show that the amounts were paid to the said Balakrishnan and those amounts were later on embezzled by him, the assessee has proved a loss of Rs. 13,601 in the accounting year relevant to the assessment year under consideration. However, on the facts, the Tribunal found that neither before the Tribunal nor before the authorities below the assessee had produced any evidence to support any book entry showing that an advance of Rs. 13,601 was made to Balakrishnan, who did not r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arned counsel appearing for the assessee relied upon another decision of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT v. Durga Jewellers [1988] 172 ITR 134. According to the facts arising in the decision, a theft had taken place in the business premises of the assessee. The first information report was lodged by the assessee indicating the extent of the property which had been stolen. The police was successful in recovering the major portion of the property stolen which was returned to the assessee. A final report was made by the police stating that some of the properties were not recoverable. It is on this basis that the claim made by the assessee for deduction of Rs. 25,000 being the value of the unrecovered goods which had been stole ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
