9911796707
TMI Blog1990 (1) TMI 66X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Gupta and Co. with Rs. 48,476 and one S. Surain Singh with Rs. 48,400. The respondent was constructing a building and the cost of material was debited to the said accounts. The Income-tax Officer came to the conclusion that Messrs. Gupta and Co. and S. Surain Singh did not exist and that those entries were fictitious. He sought to apply section 68 of the Act. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orrect interpretation of section 68. We, therefore, direct the Tribunal to state the case and refer the following question of law to this court : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in directing that the additions made on account of unexplained cash credits would not be called unexplained cash credits under section 6 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fidavit of the Commissioner of Income-tax has not been rebutted by the respondent in any way. It was open to the respondent to have placed on record material to show that the service of the order dated May 14, 1986, was or must have been made prior to February 27, 1987. In the absence of any such averment, we see no reason to disbelieve the affidavit of the Commissioner of Income-tax which support ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
