9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (12) TMI 964X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ttal, J:- 1. This appeal was admitted by this Court vide order dated 22.1.2007 for determination of the following substantial question of law:- "Whether under the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal is justified in arriving at the findings on the true and correct interpretation of the provisions of Section 68 which are misconceived?" 2. Briefly stated the facts ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the Assessing Officer on account of cash credit in the name of Sarla Devi to be unexplained income of the assessee under Section 68 of the Act was affirmed. On further appeal by the assessee, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bench "A", Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal") vide order dated 24.3.2006 while partly allowing the appeal of the assessee, upheld the aforesaid additio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stablished by the ratio of following decisions:- i) Sree Lekha Banerjee and others vs. CIT 49 ITR 112(SC). ii) CIT vs. Nivedan Vanijay Niyojan Ltd. 263 ITR 623 (Cal). iii) Shankar Industries vs. CIT 114 ITR 689 (Cal). iv) CIT vs. Ruby Traders and Exports Ltd. 182 CTR 596 (Cal). v) CIT vs. Nivedan Vanijya Niyojan Ltd. 182 CTR 605 (Cal). vi) CIT Precis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f income and therefore, accumulation of Rs.40,000/- cash, advanced to the assessee, routed through bank account is not satisfactorily explained. The Assessing Officer was, therefore, justified in making the addition of Rs.40,000/-. The additional evidence furnished by the assessee before us is also of no consequence in so far as the source of credit of Rs.40,000/- has not been satisfactorily expla ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
