Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2024 (10) TMI 153

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ite an opportunity for it, no document was submitted. The bank statement has been filed along with the appeal. The source of it has not been disclosed. The amount of Rs. 41,49,807/- was deposited in the bank account in cash. No justification for deposit of the amount in cash could be given by the appellant and that too when it was not a small amount but was more than Rs. 41 lakhs. No transaction of M/s Amit Traders could be proved - the appellant could not give explanation to the admission made by the deceased appellant for embezzlement of Rs. 65 lakhs and further admission that the amount was used for the construction Anil Marriage Hall in Rajinder Nagar Colony, Fatehpur. The land was otherwise purchased partly in the name of deceased appe .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... trict Cooperative Bank on 08.07.1972 as Peon and later on promoted as Cashier on Ad-hoc basis and continued till the year 2002. He was demoted to the post of peon from where he retired in February 2013 from the same post. 4. An FIR number 187/2011 was registered on 16.06.2011 for the offence under section 409, 419, 420, 467, 468, 469 and 471 of IPC with Police Station, Kotwali, Fatehpur, Uttar Pradesh. The FIR was containing allegation of embezzlement of funds of District Cooperative Bank in Khaga Branch of District Fatehpur, U.P. A charge sheet in pursuance to the FIR was filed on 02.12.2012 against deceased appellant Maan Singh by the concerned Police Station. The respondents thereupon recorded the ECIR on 08.03.2018 and initiated the inv .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... statement on 20.02.2020 stated about his earning to the tune of Rs. 65 lakhs from the business and used for the construction of Anil Marriage Hall in Fatehpur. The part land was purchased in the name of his wife on 01.08.2005. The part of the land was in the name of his wife and the remaining in the name of the deceased. The respondents accordingly attached Anil Marriage Hall vide the order dated 23.03.2021. It is without following due process of law and therefore the appeal has been filed to challenge the order. It is mainly on the facts alleging that despite no material against deceased appellant and despite disclosure of the source of income, attachment of the property belonging to the deceased was made and confirmed. Argument of the App .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... an opportunity given by the Tribunal to raise even the legal issue, if any. The learned counsel for the appellant chose to restrict his argument in reference to the facts given above and accordingly the learned counsel for the respondent was called upon to argue the appeal. Argument of Side Opposite (Respondent) 11. The learned counsel for the respondent contested the appeal after referring to the facts because no legal issue was raised by the appellant during the course of the argument. The elaborate argument was made by the counsel for the respondent and would be referred while dealing with the arguments of the counsel for the appellant to avoid a bulky order with repetition of facts. Finding of the Tribunal 12. It is submitted by the lea .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... herein. The source of it has not been disclosed. 15. The amount of Rs. 41,49,807/- was deposited in the bank account in cash. No justification for deposit of the amount in cash could be given by the appellant and that too when it was not a small amount but was more than Rs. 41 lakhs. No transaction of M/s Amit Traders could be proved. The fact aforesaid is relevant even if we ignore the statement of the appellant for admission for embezzlement of Rs. 65 lakh though the statement is admissible in the eye of law and has rightly been relied by the Authority while issuing provisional attachment order and the Adjudicating Authority to confirm it. 16. The learned counsel for the appellant could not give explanation to the admission made by the de .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates