9911796707
TMI Blog1985 (10) TMI 17X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rn of income declaring an income of Rs. 84,862 on June 30, 1975, for the assessment year 1975-76. The assessee was asked to state whether there was any payment in cash above Rs. 2,500. The assessee stated that no payment had been made in cash above Rs. 2,500. The assessing authority scrutinised examined the cash book of the firm and found that a sum of Rs. 35,000 was paid in cash to M/s. Kishore Trading Co. on May 14, 1974. The assessee filed a reply on October 28, 1977, claiming that the payment was made under exceptional circumstances at the request of M/s. Kishore Trading Company which is also an assessee. Copies of three letters, one addressed to the assessee by M/s. Kishore Trading Co. and reply by the assessee to Kishore Trading Co. a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. Learned counsel for the Revenue has vehemently argued that the assessee firm and M/s. Kishore Trading Company were sister concerns and belonged to the Bangad Group and that the assessee in the first instance had denied that any payment in cash above Rs. 2,500 was made during the assessment year 1975-76 and thereafter, when the cash book and account books were scrutinised and examined by the Income-tax Officer, the assessing authority, it was found that a payment of Rs. 35,000 was made in cash to M/s. Kishore Trading Co. on May 14, 1974, and the letters produced by the assessee, non-petitioner firm do not bear any reference number and is merely an after- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wer the question of law referred to it in the context of those facts. A finding of fact may be defective in law if there is no evidence to support it or if the finding is unreasonable or perverse, but it is not open to the assessee to challenge such a finding of fact unless he has applied for a reference of the specific question under section 66(1). It is for the party who applies for a reference to challenge those findings of fact first by expressly raising the question about the validity of the findings of fact and if he has failed to do so, he is not entitled to urge before the High Court that the findings of the Appellate Tribunal are vitiated for any reason". Mr. Ranka has submitted that in the present case also, the Commissioner of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
