Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s. Kothari Marketing Pvt. Ltd. Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward 6 (2) Kolkata & Another

2016 (7) TMI 680 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT

Addition u/s 68 - burden of proof - Held that:- As during the penalty proceedings assessee had furnished particulars of 19 creditors who had allegedly advanced money to him. Even that letter does not disclose any address with respect to 8 of the creditors and the creditors whose addresses were furnished by the assessee were not available, according to the finding recorded by the learned Tribunal at the address indicated by the assessee. We, as such, are unable to attach any importance to the sub .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

r. Debasish De For the Respondent : Md. Nizamuddin, Mrs. A. Qureshi, Mrs.Soma Chatterjee, Advocates ORDER The Court : The appeal is directed against a judgment and order dated 27th September, 2004 passed by the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal B Bench, Kolkata in ITA NO.1492/K/02 pertaining to the assessment year 1994-95 by which an appeal preferred by the assessee was dismissed. The assessee has come up in appeal. The following questions of law were formulated on 30th January, 2008 when th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

r confirming addition of unexplained loan transactions under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in absence of any material brought on record by the Assessing Officer to hold the loan transactions as unexplained the appellant having already discharged the initial onus of proof as per the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court of India ? Additions were made; (a) on account of alleged share application money (b) on account of money allegedly borrowed by the assessee The learned Tribunal upheld .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

T(A) has not carried out the directions given by the Ld. CIT(A) in the original order. We find that in the earlier appellate order the Ld. CIT(A) has directed the Assessing Officer to make enquiries. For making the enquiries the Assessing Officer wrote letter to the creditors but those were returned unserved as the creditors were not available at the address given by the assessee. Thus to say that the Assessing Officer has not made compliance with the Ld.CIT(A) order will not be fully justified. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version