9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (7) TMI 47X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ions of law: "(a) Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in upholding the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) without giving its own finding? (b) Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in confirming the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and thereby deleting the trading addition of Rs. 11,15,967 made by the Assessing Officer? (c) Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in deleting the trading addition made by the Assessing Officer on the basis of estimated sales after rejecting the books of account maintained by the assessee? (d) Whether the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is perverse in law when it passed a non-speaking order?" The fact ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r cent, declared by the assessee. Accordingly, estimating the turnover of the assessee at Rs. 90,71,830 a gross profit of Rs. 13,60,774 was worked out. Since the assessee had shown the gross profit at Rs. 2,44,807, the balance amount of Rs. 11,15,967 was added to the income of the assessee on this account as well. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal to the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). The addition of Rs. 1,67,225 was not contested before the Commissioner. The same was accordingly confirmed. However, in regard to the trading addition, the Commissioner observed that the sale reflected on the rough slip as on April 22, 1993, could not be taken as the basis for estimation of the sales during the assessment year 1993-94 because th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the proposition that every fact for and against the assessee must be considered and a finding on the question involved should be clearly given by the Tribunal, reliance is placed on the decision of the Supreme Court in Omar Salay Mohamed Sait v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 151. We are unable to agree with learned counsel for the appellant. There is no quarrel with the proposition that the Tribunal being a final fact-finding authority, it is required to take into account every fact for and against the assessee with due care and record its finding thereon. The Tribunal's order must clearly indicate the issues which arose for determination; the evidence-pro and contra in regard to each one of them and the findings reached thereon. There is no gainsay ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al. Though it does appear that the Tribunal has not specifically recorded its own findings on the issues raised but from the order it is clear that it has endorsed the view taken by the Commissioner (Appeals). As noted supra, the Commissioner had recorded in no uncertain terms that except for the slip containing particulars of sale made on April 22, 1993, no other material was brought on record by the Assessing Officer to support the estimation of the sales and gross profit. Admittedly, the sale reflected on the slip pertained to the assessment year 1994-95 and not the year under reference. Thus, in this factual scenario, we find it difficult to hold that the Tribunal's alleged failure to return independent findings on the issues raised giv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
