9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (7) TMI 264X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... een wrongly recorded probably by an oversight. Para 17 of the Tribunal order reads as under: "In his case, from the explanation of the assessee, the urgency of disbursing bonus on 8th March, 1991, does not seem to be plausible as the same could have been disbursed even on the next day also because in case the assessee had taken the amount by crossed payee cheque, the amount of the same could have been realised by the assessee the next day because if we consider the address and the bank accounts of assessee and that of M/s Singh Finance and Investment Co. (P) Ltd. Amritsar, from whom loan of Rs. 1,00,000 is taken by the assessee, both are operating their business in Amritsar and as the learned Departmental Representative has even mentione ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eir bank account in the same bank and so even the realisation proceedings of cheques issued on 8th March, 1991, could have been done on the same day and so there was no justification in accepting the bearer cheque in violation of s. 269SS of the IT Act, 1961." (3) The correct facts are as under: (i) The name of the finance company is M/s Singh Investment and Hire Purchase Private Limited and not M/s Singh Finance and Investment Company (P) Ltd. as noted in the order. The correct name of the finance company is given in para 4 of affidavit of S. Balbir Singh filed before the AO with copy at p.1 of paper book. (ii) The observation that the assessee-company had account with the same bank is also not correct, nor it is borne out from th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of raising loan of Rs. 1,00,000 on 8th March, 1991, is clearly proved and the Hon'ble Bench has misdirected itself on the wrong presumption that the assessee and the finance company had their accounts in the same bank which is not a correct fact. (4) Further attention is invited to paras. 19 to 21 of the Tribunal order. The urgency of accepting Rs. 92,000 by cash from the promoters has not been appreciated on the correct facts. The mistakes are as under: (i) The cheques of excise duty are sent to the Chief Accounts Officer, Chandigarh. The cheques are sent against clearance of goods and if the cheques are bounced in due course then the goods are deemed to have been cleared without the payment of excise duty, making the assessee liabl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rom a finance company, M/s Singh Investment and Hire Purchase (P) Ltd., Amritsar, by cheque No. 925744, dt. 8th March, 1991, which was drawn by the lender company on its account with New Bank of India, Queens Road Branch, Amritsar. Shri Kapoor vehemently stated that the assessee had no account with New Bank of India. He further pointed out that the loan was returned to the aforesaid company by payee account cheque, dt. 28th June, 1991, drawn on Bank of India, Vijay Nagar Branch, Amritsar, where the assessee had account. It is stated that the findings arrived at by the Tribunal are contrary to the evidence placed on record. Accordingly, it was stated that the mistake apparent from the record (stated in the above application) should be rectif ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... here was sufficient cause which lead to the failure on the part of the assessee in complying with the provisions of s. 269SS of the Act. The Tribunal has mentioned number of circumstances, which proved that the assessee failed to show that there was a reasonable cause for the failure. Shri S.C. Pahwa, the learned Departmental Representative, further pointed out that the members of the Bench, who passed the order have made certain observations in the order, these observations could not be ignored and it could also not be said that these observations are without any basis. 3.1. Shri S.C. Pahwa, the learned Departmental Representative, drew our attention to the following observations made by the Tribunal: "The assessee and M/s Singh Inve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cient cause for its failure. After carefully going through the order of the Tribunal, it cannot be said that the order was not passed keeping in view the material or evidence existing on record. Even as regards the name of finance company it would be clear that the AO has mentioned the name of finance company as M/s Singh Finance and Investment Co. (P) Ltd., Amritsar. It seems that the assessee has never pointed out before the authorities below that correct address of the finance company was "M/s Singh Investment and Hire Purchase (P) Ltd." In our view, even if it is assumed that the name of the finance company was not correctly stated by the AO the same cannot be rectified at this stage. The proper course for the assessee was to file an ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
