9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (10) TMI 425X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pondent to defend his position or cross-examine the two persons on whose affidavits, the AO had relied upon to conclude that respondent had made certain purchases from those persons identified as Hawala Traders. AO also should have investigated further or should have dealt with in his assessment order as to why he was not accepting the explanation of respondent that he had paid in excess throug ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l of the revenue. Mr. Mohanty states he is not pressing question no.6.1 but is pressing only question no.6.2 in the appeal. We find that no question of law arises and the question as framed in the appeal is also a question of fact and cannot be called a question of law. 2 The assessee was engaged in the business of marine contract and filed return of income for the relevant A.Y. 2010-2011 decla ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... valid explanation with substantiating evidence in respect of cost incurred towards purchases required in the course of his business and in support of his contention, has filed relevant bank statements, challan copies etc. In the assessment order, the primary reliance is on affidavits filed by one Vinit A Jamsandekar and Rasiklal B Shah when Sales Tax investigated the affairs of those persons who w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5,62,560/- through the Bank L.C. to one of the parties allegedly doing business of issuing bogus bills, has also not been dealt with in the assessment order. 5 The department has impugned this order of CIT (Appeals) before ITAT, which also observed that Assessing Officer has relied upon third party statement without supplying it to the assessee or considered the closing stock or considered the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in his assessment order as to why he was not accepting the explanation of respondent that he had paid in excess of ₹ 25,62,560/- through the Bank L.C. to one of the parties allegedly doing business of issuing bogus bills. 6 In our view, the Tribunal has not committed any perversity or applied incorrect principles to the given facts and when the facts and circumstances are properly analyse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
