9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (6) TMI 284X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l of the impugned assessment order would clearly show that the authority below has taken into consideration the defenses raised by the petitioner herein and on a comparison of the ledger of the petitioner with the ledger maintained by M/S.Mohanlal Jewelers (P) Ltd, the nexus between the two has been set out in the tabulated statement in paragraph No.8.1 of the impugned order. The impugned order also goes on to state that some of the entries in the 'J PACK' does not find place in the ledger of the petitioner. The respondent has considered each of the submissions made, particularly, the defense with reference to the plea for cross-examination and had passed the order. Therefore, it cannot be stated that the order is a non-speaking ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .12.2019, wherein a total income of Rs.48,979/- was declared. 4. It appears that on 10.11.2020, a search was conducted under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act at the premises of M/S.Mohanlal Jewelers (P) Ltd, Shri Suresh Kumar Khatri and others at the office located at Kondithope, Chennai. During the search, certain incriminating materials relating to the petitioner firm and other dealers were seized by the respondent and based on this search, it was found that the group had been using a customized software, called 'J PACK' solely for the purpose of recording the unaccounted gold and cash transactions carried on by M/S.Mohanlal Jewellers with others. Two years thereafter the petitioner by their letter dated 02.12.2022 were inform ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the order has been passed by flouting the principles of natural justice, the petitioner is before this Court. 6. Mr.A.Thiagarajan, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr.S.Karunakar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner would submit that the entire order has been pronounced on the basis of some third party's documents, which has been created by the third party and not by the petitioner. Further, the petitioner has not been given any opportunity to rebut the statements made by these third parties by cross-examining them. He would therefore contend that the principles of natural justice have been totally given a go-by. 7. He would submit that since proper opportunity has not been given to the petitioner, the petitio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sel appearing on behalf of the respondent would submit that a mere perusal of the impugned order would clearly show the opportunities that have been extended to the petitioner to submit their objections and further the document, based upon which the impugned order has been passed, was a software, which is also made available for the petitioner's scrutiny. Further, the request for cross-examination has also been extensively considered in the impugned order. The learned Senior Standing Counsel would further submit that a perusal of the impugned order would show how some of the entries in the 'J PACK' have been tallied with the entries in the petitioner s ledger book, which will prove the connection between the petitioner and the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Jewelers (P) Ltd, the nexus between the two has been set out in the tabulated statement in paragraph No.8.1 of the impugned order. The impugned order also goes on to state that some of the entries in the 'J PACK' does not find place in the ledger of the petitioner. The respondent has considered each of the submissions made, particularly, the defense with reference to the plea for cross-examination and had passed the order. Therefore, it cannot be stated that the order is a non-speaking one. The petitioner has also appeared for an enquiry before the concerned authority. 13. Therefore, in all fairness and relying upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in (2010) 15 Supreme Court Cases 283, interests of justice requir ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
