9911796707
TMI Blog1994 (4) TMI 13X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se are that the assessee is the proprietor of Pukhraj Nehalchand. There was a cash credit of Rs. 35,000 in the name of Bheru Nath Mohanlal and Co. Bheru Nath, a partner of Bheru Nath Mohanlal and Co. was examined by the Income-tax Officer, A-Ward, Pali, on May 22, 1978, wherein it was deposed that such entries are only havala entries and no money passed from the said party to the assessee. The assessee contended that the statement of Mohanlal was false and an affidavit dated December 28, 1978, of Mohanlal was filed wherein he has stated about his mental state of affairs and confirmed the credit entry. The assessee was required to produce Mohanlal to substantiate his contention and to discharge his burden. The authorised representative of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... income from undisclosed sources was upheld. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner has taken into consideration .the cash balance with reference to the three figures of Rs. 10,000, Rs. 20,000 and Rs. 5,000, which entries were made on May 7, 1975, May 10, 1975, and May 16, 1975, respectively. It was also found that Mohanlal carried on a havala entry business from the assessment years 1976-77 to 197879 and various parties to whom the amount is alleged to have been shown have surrendered the amount of entries. The names of some other parties have been given by the appellate authority and it was also taken as one of the grounds. It was also found that in respect of the assessment year 1977-78 notice under section 148 of the Income-tax Act was i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... existing in the books of account is not genuine has to be discharged by the Revenue and it was discharged by way of statement of Mohanlal recorded on May 22, 1978, and the onus thus shifted to the assessee. The alleged creditor in the present case has given the statement on May 22, 1978, and has subsequently resiled. Therefore, one of the two statements is false. The entire evidence which was produced by the assessee has duly been considered and it is not a case, where the finding has been recorded without any evidence or on the basis of inadmissible evidence. The question as to which of the two statements is reliable has to be determined by the authorities on the basis of other facts and circumstances of the case. It is not a case where th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
