9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 1203X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t. "Whether, on the facts of the case, the Income-tax Tribunal was justified in law in holding and also (sic.) whether there was any material for its finding that the cash credit in the name of Sri Ram Kumar was not proved (sic.)?" 2. The facts giving rise to the present reference are that M/S Gopalji Ambika Prasad, Azamgarh (the assessee) filed it's Income-tax Return on 31.10.1977 for the Assessment Year 1977-78 in the capacity of registered firm showing an income of Rs. 55,088/-, which was revised on 27.08.1979 showing an income of Rs. 54,593/- The Assessing Officer, during assessment, found that there was credit of Rs. 25,000/- in the name of Sri Ram Kumar on 29.07.1976, in the books of the account of the assessee. The Assessing Office ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eal was allowed and order of CIT (A) was set aside. 3. We have heard Sri Rakesh Kumar for the assessee and Sri Shambhu Chopra, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Revenue. A perusal of the order of Assessing Officer shows that Sri Ram Kumar was examined by the Assessing Officer and he had also filed copy of his bank account, which proved that Ram Kumar was having a bank account in his name, at the time of advancing loan to the assessee he was having sufficient money in his account from where he had credited money to the assessee through cheque and this amount was repaid by the assessee to Sri Ram Kumar through bank draft. These transactions have been disbelieved for the reasons (i) Sri Ram Kumar was a man of ordinary means as he had ad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent order. In Dhirajlal Girdharilal. Vs. C.I.T.(1954) 26 I.T.R. 736, Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd. vs. C.I.T. , (1954) 26 ITR 775 the Apex Court has set aside the assessment on the ground that it is based on bare suspicion, conjectures and surmises and further held in the first case that finding of fact would be vitiated if it is based partly on conjectures or on material which is partly inadmissible or irrelevant even though there may be some other relevant admissible material to support the finding. But the order must be read as a whole to see whether the findings are vitiated.
5.For the aforesaid discussion the question referred to us is answered in negative i.e. in favour of the assessee and against the department. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
