9911796707
TMI Blog1988 (9) TMI 24X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sioner of Income-tax (Appeals) had no power to set aside the assessment with a direction to the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner (Assessment) to redo the same de novo after making full inquiries/investigation into the various aspects of the appellant's case ? (2) Whether, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) in terms of section 250(4) is bound in law to make enquiries himself only and has no power to direct the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner (Assessment) to make further enquiry ? (3) Whether, in law, the Tribunal was right in holding that the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) was without any rationale and further whether the Tribunal was correct in law in deciding the matter itself without any material and with ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ms, namely, (1) Shankar Trading Corporation for Rs. 3,07,598, (2) Kumar Agencies for Rs. 1,76,828, and (3) Quickies Clean .Sales for Rs. 1,86,067, were never made to them. The said concerns were bogus and were merely floated for the purpose of declaring sales which, in fact, were never made. The goods, subject-matter of those sales, appeared to have been sold to some other parties on or about the same time at a much higher price. With these findings, he made an addition of Rs. 6,70,493 under section 69A of the Act and further enhanced the profit by 5% on the alleged sales to the said three firms amounting to Rs. 33,525. Feeling aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). It was held that there ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rections for the enquiry to be made, should be given by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). The finding of the Tribunal that the order in this case has been set aside by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) merely to get the enquiry done in the case of Shri R. N. Sehgal is, in our opinion, a pure finding of fact and no question of law arises out of it." In our view, the order is absolutely correct and calls for no interference. We have examined the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal dated November 24, 1986, whereby the appeal of the assessee was allowed. It was nowhere held that the Commissioner of Income-tax had no jurisdiction to remand the case with a direction to the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner (Assessment) to ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mmissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) held that there was no sufficient material on the record to arrive at the said finding and the conclusions drawn by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner (Assessment) required to be further supported by proper evidence/investigation before the said conclusion could be said to be tenable and reasonable. The learned Tribunal accepted the view of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) that there was no sufficient material to hold that the sales to the said three firms were not genuine. It was further found that the Commissioner had doubts about the affairs of R. N. Sehgal who was found to be the proprietor of the said three concerns but that suspicion justified an investigation with regard to the affairs of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
