9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (1) TMI 577X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nst order dated 16.11.2007 passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'the Appellate Tribunal'). The subject matter of the appeal pertains to the assessment year 1989-90. The appeal has been admitted on the following substantial question of law. "Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is justified in sustaining the addition of a sum of Rs.25,88,026/- under the head of unproved cash purchases?" The factual background for which aforesaid substantial question of law arises for consideration need mention infra. 3. The assessee company is engaged in the manufacture and export of finished leather. The assessee filed the return of income on 20.12.1989 for the assessment year 1989-90 disclosing an income of Rs.4, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erefore by an order dated 18.03.2004, rejected the claim of the assessee and the cash purchases claimed by it to the extent of Rs.25,88,026/- were treated as unproved cash purchases. The Assessing Officer also directed initiation of proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. 5. Being aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) by an order dated 16.02.2005 inter alia held that the assessee has failed to produce the stock register, inward register and complete purchase details of Rs.25,88,026/-. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) further held that several details produced before him are in Urdu for which English translations are not provided for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ad of unproved cash purchases which is contrary to the record. 8. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Revenue has submitted that no substantial question of law arises for consideration in this appeal and the matter is concluded against the assessee by findings of fact which are based on the material available on record and by no stretch of imagination, it can be said to be perverse. 9. We have considered the submissions made on both sides and have perused the record. 10. It is trite law that this Court in exercise of powers under Section 260A of the Act cannot interfere with a finding of fact unless and until the same is shown to be perverse (See Syeda Rahimunnisa vs. Malan Bi by LRs (2016) 10 SCC 315 and Principal Commissio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
