TMI Blog2011 (4) TMI 731X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the duty of the Assessing Officer to collect more evidence in support of the fact that there was undisclosed income of Rs. 7 Lakhs in the hands of the Assessee - The appeal is dismissed - 22 of 2000 (R) - - - Dated:- 28-4-2011 - Mr. Justice Prakash Tatia, Mr. Justice D.N. Upadhyay, JJ. For the Appellant : Mr. Deepak Roshan, Sr. S.C.(Income Tax) Mr. Amit Kumar, J.C. to Sr. S.C. For the Respondent : Mr. B.K. Jalan, Advocate Heard learned counsel for the appellant. The appellant is aggrieved by the orders passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), Ranchi dated 24.12.1996 by which, the appeal of the Assessee preferred against the order under Section 143 (3) of the Income Tax Act for the year 1994-95 was partly a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itted serious error of law by ignoring the fact that the alleged retraction of the Assessee was led in evidence during the course of the hearing before the Assessing Officer but since that was after delay of more than two years, therefore, such retraction statement has no value and should have been rejected. Learned counsel for the appellant relied upon the judgment delivered in the case of Greenview Restaurant v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax reported in 263 I.T.R. 169. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that in the said case the Hon'ble Supreme Court, after taking note of the fact that there was statement of the Assessee under Section 143(2) and retraction was made after delay of about 2 years, the Hon'ble Supreme Cour ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... contained three facts-(i) that he had no undisclosed income, (ii) the Assessee had undisclosed income of Rs. 7 Lakhs, and (iii) that he had invested Rs. 4 Lakhs in stock of M/s. Moolchand Jain and Sons in support of which there was no evidence collected by the Assessing Officer and then deposit of Rs. 3 Lakhs in the Bank Account which could not have been if his statement as given at the relevant time is deemed correct, because the Assessee also stated that he lent some of the amounts to some persons. Therefore relying on only one such statement given by the Assessee in these circumstances where out of three two facts were found to be not correct, then in these facts and circumstances, it was the duty of the Assessing Officer to collect more ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
