9911796707
TMI Blog1991 (5) TMI 44X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng opportunity to cross-examine Rao Bikram Singh whose statements are alleged to have been recorded by the Income-tax Officer and have been used against the assessee ? 2. Whether the Tribunal was right in law in dismissing the appeal when stamped receipts for repayment of loan and interest (four) duly signed by Rao Bikram Singh were furnished, affidavit of Shri Chiranji Lal Chaudhary, son of Gopi Ram Choudhary, Finance Broker, Jaipur, dated August 22, 1981, was submitted and he was produced and cross-examined by the Income-tax Officer ? 3. Whether the Tribunal was right in law in holding that confirmation of Rao Bikram Singh has not been provided by the assessee during the course of assessment ? 4. Whether the Tribunal was legally justif ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessing authority, under its order dated March 1, 1985, for the assessment year 1974-75, framed the assessment order and the total taxable income was shown to be Rs. 19,570. It appears that a sum of Rs. 15,000 was added to the income of the assessee from undisclosed sources. The said amount of Rs. 15,000 is said to have been deposited in cash by Rao Bikram Singh with the assessee and not through cheque. The assessing authority, under the aforesaid order of assessment, came to the conclusion that the assessee had failed to discharge the burden of proving the genuineness of the deposit of Rs. 15,000. The burden was on him to prove the genuineness of the cash credit, but he failed to discharge the onus. The assessing authority came to the co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stood discharged by the assessee by producing debit entries bearing the signature of Rao Bikram Singh under which the payment had been made to him ; and the broker through whom the transaction has taken place had been examined. But the Tribunal did not discuss the aforesaid arguments advanced. Therefore, the questions sought to be referred arise out of the order of the Tribunal. A bare reading of section 256 of the Act shows that the jurisdiction of this court under the aforesaid section is a special jurisdiction which is neither appellate, revisional nor supervisory jurisdiction and only this court can order reference of questions of law which arise out of the order of the Tribunal. A question can be said to arise if it is raised before t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sfactory or not. The question whether any cash entry is genuine or not is a question of fact and this has been the consistent view of this court and other High Courts. In the case of Calicut Tea Mart, Tea Dealers and Commission Agents v. CIT [1989] 178 ITR 198 (Ker), the Tribunal held that the assessee was not able to prove the genuineness of cash credits and this being a finding of fact, no question arises for reference. In the case of Ramsing and Co. v. CIT [1984] 146 ITR 166, the Madhya Pradesh High Court took the view that the finding of the Tribunal that the cash credits appearing in the name of a party had not been proved to be genuine is finding of fact and no question of law arises from the order of the Tribunal for reference to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
