9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (4) TMI 67X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essee against the order of the Tribunal dated October 20, 2000, in I.T.A. No. 7541 of 1996 in respect of the assessment year 1993-94. In this appeal, our opinion is sought on the following questions: "(i) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of this case, the Tribunal erred in holding that an amount of Rs. 2,63,816 claimed by the assessee by way of deduction on account of business loss was no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on. On inquiry, it was stated that this cash amount had been embezzled by one of the employees of the assessee-company. His name was Paresh Vadia who had inflated the freight charges in the vouchers. In support, the assessee has relied upon an affidavit dated December 21, 1994. Further, reliance was also placed by the assessee on the legal opinion of an advocate dated June 15, 1993. According to t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rguments: Mr. Vipul Joshi, the learned advocate for appellant-assessee, vehemently urged that, in this case, the Tribunal had lost sight of a draft report prepared by the chartered accountant of the assessee which came to be seized by the Department on April 21, 1993, when search operations were carried out. He submitted that this report was in the stage of preparation when the Department carried ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ore the Income-tax Officer by the assessee as to the date on which the assessee detected inflated expenses vouchers. No evidence has been led to show the circumstances under which the assessee detected embezzlement. No affidavit has been filed by the assessee before the Income-tax Officer indicating circumstances under which the matter was referred to the chartered accountant for preparing a repor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Income-tax Act. Therefore, we do not see any reason to interfere with the factual finding recorded by the Tribunal. Conclusion: Accordingly, we answer both the above questions in the negative, i.e., in favour of the Department and against the assessee. In view of our findings to the above two questions, it is not necessary for us to answer question No. (iii). In the circumstances, the appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
