9911796707
TMI Blog1984 (2) TMI 32X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and No. 86 of 1982. The facts in the judgment are being given from I.T. Case No. 106 of 1976. The case of the assessee relates to the assessment year 1970-71. He was carrying on business in woollen shawls. During the course of the assessment proceedings, it came to the notice of the Income-tax Officer (ITO) that the assessee was enjoying overdraft facility from the Hindustan Commercial Bank Ltd. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... duly executed as per rules but the same were not preserved by the bank after the adjustment of accounts. The ITO made further inquiries from the bank and came to know that there were seven fixed deposit receipts of the value of Rs. 84,500 purchased from March 19, 1969, to April 6, 1970, for the purpose of furnishing deposit guarantees. After obtaining the said information, the assessee was asked ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he added an amount of Rs. 84,500 to the assessee's income. The assessee went up in appeal before the A AC who upheld the order of the ITO. The assessee went up in further appeal to the Tribunal. It held that the ITO had not brought on record any evidence to show that the fixed deposit receipts were actually purchased by the assessee and that even if it be assumed that the holders of the FDRs ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ounting to Rs. 84,500 and not the various persons in whose names the receipts were prepared by the bank, While coming to that conclusion, it took into consideration all the relevant evidence on the record. The question whether a transaction is a benami or not is a question of fact and the finding recorded by the Tribunal is final. In the said view we are fortified by the decision of the Supreme Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have come to a conclusion entirely different from that of the Tribunal. In other words, such a finding can be reviewed only on the ground that there is no evidence to support it or that it is perverse. It has not been shown to us that the case falls in either of the exceptions. No additional argument was advanced in the other petitions. Consequently, we do not find any merit in these petition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
