TMI Blog2010 (8) TMI 693X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... plausibility of the explanation submitted by the assessee on the basis of sales bill No. 46 to 56 produced by him also requires to be considered by the Tribunal. - case remanded back to tribunal. - IT APPEAL NO. 593 OF 2006 - - - Dated:- 18-8-2010 - ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, JJ. Avneesh Jhingan for the Appellant. Sukant Gupta for the Respondent. ORDER Ajay Kumar Mittal, J. ‑ This appeal has been preferred by the assessee under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short "the Act") against order dated 25-8-2006 passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar Bench, Amritsar (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal"), in I.T. (S.S.) A. No. 29 (ASR)/2003 and Cross Objection No. 12 (ASR)/2003, for the block period 1-4-1989 to 30-3-2000, proposing to raise the following substantial questions of law:- "(a) Whether Tribunal has failed to appreciate that there was no occasion with the respondents to exercise their power of search and seizure under the Income-tax Act and the said powers exercised by them are without jurisdiction? (b) Whether the Tribunal has erred in not excluding the Oral Statements of the parties in the p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e initiated against the Petitioner in view judgment reported as (1986) 3 Supreme Court Cases 489 - Commissioner of Income-tax, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh Delhi v. Tarsem Kumar?" 2. Facts necessary for the disposal of the present appeal may be noticed. On 6-10-1999, a search was conducted by the Central Excise Department on the business and residential premises of the assessee and unaccounted cash amounting to Rs. 10,25,000 was found and recovered. The assessee failed to explain the source or produce any corroborative evidence on account of the aforesaid cash. The Excise authorities informed the Income-tax Department vide letter dated 16-3-2000 regarding unaccounted cash amounting to Rs. 10,25,000 seized from the assessee. The said amount was considered as sale proceeds of excisable goods as the assessee had not produced any evidence about the rightful possession of the cash. The Director of Income-tax (Inv.) New Delhi authorized the team consisting of two Income-tax Officers, one Deputy Director of Investigation and one Additional Director of Investigation, New Delhi on 30-3-2000 for requisitioning the cash amount of Rs. 10,25,000 from the Central Excise Authorities, New Delhi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... section 132(1) of the Act is no longer in dispute as a Division Bench of this Court in CIT v. Paras Rice Mills [2010] 323 ITR 182 has decided the issue against the assessee and in favour of the revenue. It has been held therein as under:- "We are of the view that the Tribunal when hearing an appeal against the order of assessment could not go into the question of validity or otherwise of any administrative decision for conducting the search and seizure. The same may be the subject-matter of challenge in independent proceedings where the question of validity or otherwise of administrative order could be gone into. The appellate authority was concerned with the correctness or otherwise of the assessment." 6. Following the aforesaid judgment, it is held that the Tribunal had rightly held that the validity of search and seizure operation could not be gone into by the Tribunal in the appeal proceedings. 7. Adverting to the second submission, learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the CIT(A) while adjudicating the matter on merits had recorded in para 2.1 as under:- "2-1- I have considered the matter carefully, and I find force in the contentions of the Learned Counsel f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t and it validates further the Learned Counsel's averments that Shri Raj Kumar Bhatia had been pointed as a consignee agent for the electronic components and he is an existing assessee. In the balance sheet of M/s R.K. Enterprises for the assessment year 2000-01 a sum of Rs. 10,25,000 appearing in the name of Rajnish Bhatia clearly proves that he was a sundry debtor. The details of the amounts received from the consignee agent as well as the date of deposit in their bank have also been made available. A copy of the bank account has also been furnished before the undersigned. (vi) That the partnership firm, M/s R.K. Enterprises, is also an existing assessee, and they had appointed Sh. Rajnish Bhatia as a consignee agent w.e.f. 15-5-1999 vide an agreement of even date (a copy of the said agreement lying in the house was also seized by the Excise authorities). This goes to prove that the agreement was not an afterthought. The appellant has given bill wise details of the consignment sales effected by Sh. Rajnish Bhatia on behalf of the consignor and Sh. Rajnish Bhatia reimbursed the sale proceeds collected on behalf of M/s R.K. Enterprises periodically to his principals who in-turn ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
