TMI Blog2008 (2) TMI 14X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Digest" Yes MADAN B. LOKUR, J. The Revenue is aggrieved by an order dated 8th September, 2006 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench "G" in IT(SS) No. 107/Del/2003 relevant for the block period from 1st April, 1989 to 20th February, 2000. 2. Briefly the facts of the case are that a search was conducted at the residence of the Appellant on 10th February, 2000. During the course of search, two Memorandums of Understanding (MOU) dated 1st March, 1999 were recovered. These MOUs were entered into between the Assessee, Ravi Talwar and Madhu Talwar. In terms of the MOUs, the Assessee had paid Rs.25 lakhs each to Ravi Talwar and Madhu Talwar towards part consideration for the purchase of agricultural land valued at Rs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Talwar and Madhu Talwar, there ought to have been some independent corroboration of the payment but there was no such material forthcoming. 6. In so far as the Tribunal is concerned, it was of the view that under the provisions of Section 132(4A) of the Act, there was a presumption about the correctness of the contents of the MOUs but relying upon the decision of the Karnataka High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. P.R. Metrani (HUF), [2001] 251 ITR 244, it was held that the presumption was rebuttable. It was further held that the Assessee had been able to successfully rebut the presumption. 7. Learned counsel for the Revenue reiterated the view expressed by the Assessing Officer. Unfortunately, we are not in agre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . S.M.S. Investment Corporation, [1988] 173 ITR 393. 11. Even in Income Tax Officer, B-Ward, Ernakulam v. T. Abdul Majeed, [1988] 169 ITR 440, it has been held as follows: - "It is true that section 132(4A) of the Act enables the court to presume the truth of the contents of such books. However, it is a presumption which can be rebutted. Moreover, the presumption envisaged therein is only a factual presumption. It is in the discretion of the court, depending upon other factors, to decide whether the presumption must be drawn. The expression used in the sub-section is "may be presumed" as is used in section 114 of the Evidence Act, 1872. It is not a mandate that whenever the books of account are seized, the court shall necessarily ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
