Contact us   Feedback   Annual Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2010 (8) TMI 1067 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT

2010 (8) TMI 1067 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT - TMI - Tax Appeal No. 769, 770 of 2009 - Dated:- 10-8-2010 - D.A. Mehta and H.N. Devani, JJ. Mauna M. Bhatt for the Appellant. JUDGEMENT D.A. Mehta: 1. Both these appeals have been taken up for hearing together as they arise out of common consolidated order of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 13th May, 2008. 2. In Tax Appeal No.769 of 2009, appellant revenue has proposed the following question:- "Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

loose papers seized during the course of search u/s. 132 of the Income Tax Act?" "Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal has failed in appreciating that as per section 132(4A) of the Income Tax Act the initial onus is on the assessee to dislodge the presumption pursuant to the loose papers which in this case has not been done by the assessee?" 4. The assessee in Tax Appeal No.769 of 2009 is M/s. B.M. Transport, a firm who came to be assessed for .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

course of proceedings under section 132 of the Act, one loose paper file (Annexure A-33) was seized. Page nos. 2 and 3 of the said file reflected a Debit Note of ₹ 19,00,000/- issued by M/s. B.M. Transport to M/s. M.R. Shah Transport Company. According to the Assessing Officer, the description in the said Debit Note indicated that the amount related to transportation of Palmolein/edible and other oil by complete supply of tanker lorries during financial year 2000-01. The Assessing Officer .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

eal before Commissioner (Appeals) and succeeded. Revenue preferred two separate appeals before the Tribunal which came to be dismissed by the Tribunal upholding the view adopted by Commissioner (Appeals). 8. On behalf of the appellant in both the appeals, learned advocate strenuously supported the assessment orders and submitted that both Commissioner (Appeals) and the Tribunal had failed to appreciate the facts in their proper perspective. It was submitted that Shri Pravin P. Agrawal from whose .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s. B.M. Transport to M/s. M.R. Shah Transport Company, the only presumption that could be drawn was that the HUF had entered into a business transaction with M/s. B.M. Transport, had paid a sum of ₹ 19 lakhs outside books to M/s. B.M. Transport and was, therefore, liable to be assessed to the said extent. Similarly, M/s. B.M. Transport having not reflected the said receipt in its accounts was liable to be assessed for the same amount. 9. Commissioner (Appeals) has recorded the following fi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| 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