TMI Blog2011 (10) TMI 294X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .M. Sapre and Miss. Bela M. Trivedi, JJ. R.B. Mathur for the Appellant. JUDGMENT 1. This is an appeal filed by the Commissioner of Income-tax under section 260A of the Income-tax Act against an order dated 30.6.2008 passed by I.T.A.T., Jaipur Bench, Jaipur (for short called Tribunal) in I.T.A. No. 151/JP/2008 for the period AY 2004-2005. 2. By impugned order, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal and in consequence upheld the order of Commissioner of Appeals on the issue raised in this appeal. 3. So the question that arises for consideration in this intra court appeal is whether appeal involves any substantial question of law within the meaning of section 260A ibid? 4. Having heard the learned counsel for the appellan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssary information supported with documents which could have been expected from a prudent purchaser to establish the genuineness of the claimed purchases. These documents were copies of vouchers of purchases containing all the necessary details including Sales-tax Registration Number, Bank account of the assessee showing the payment made to the parties against purchases, export invoices reflecting the export of the goods purchased from the claimed parties and copy of bank account showing the receipt of remittances of export sales. These documents have been placed at pages 1 to 77 and 83 to 115 of the paper book. Payments have been made by account payee cheques. Their confirmations were also filed. In the cases of M/s. Kartika Exports, M/s. G ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tance to the revenue. The decisions in the case of DCIT v. Adinath Industries, (supra), DCIT v. Brahmaputra Steels Pvt. Ltd. (supra), Raunaq Finance Co. v. JCIT (supra), Shiv Trading co. v. ITO (supra), Om Metals Minerals Ltd. v. JCIT (supra), Sagar Mal Daa Co. v. ITO (supra), Sambhav Gems Ltd. v. ACIT (supra), Parasmal Jain v. DCIT (supra) and Praksh Chand Vijay (supra) relied upon by the ld. A/R also support the decision of first appellate authority. We thus do not find reason to interfere with the first appellate order on the issue. The same is upheld. The ground is thus rejected." 7. Learned counsel for the appellant (Revenue) contended that firstly AO was right in adding Rs. 89,49,075/-. His second submission was that there was n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t payments were made by A/C cheques. Even confirmatory letters were filed by the purchasers. All these documents were examined by CIT (Appeals) and Tribunal in their appellate jurisdiction and then finding of fact was recorded that transactions in question entered into by the assessee are genuine and hence they must get its benefit while computing their yearly turnover for determination of their income. Such concurrent finding of fact is binding on this Court. 11. In our opinion, therefore, once the CIT(A) and Tribunal accepted the factual explanation offered by the assessee and on that basis deleted the additions made by A.O. then it would not involve any substantial question of law for its examination. In other words, this Court in its ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
