9911796707
TMI Blog1994 (10) TMI 34X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rder of the Appellate Tribunal. The assessment year concerned is 1978-79. The first of the questions on which reference is sought relates to the addition made in respect of the alleged bogus purchase of raw cashew of 50,469 pounds. According to the Department, the addition should have been of the order of Rs. 7,48,377 at the rate of Rs. 15.77 per pound of cashew. Though this was the addition made ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urged before the Commissioner (Appeals) for deleting the addition under this head had been accepted by the Commissioner and acceptance of those grounds has not been challenged in the appeal before the Tribunal by the Department. The Tribunal found that there was a practice of making local purchases from persons who were described as unauthorised dealers. This was established with reference to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y question of law arising out of this part of the Tribunal's order. The said finding, as stated earlier, is made on an appreciation of the evidence in the case and based on materials. It cannot be said that it is either perverse or unreasonable or unsupported by any materials. No question of law is, therefore, liable to be referred out of this part of the Tribunal's order. The second ground on wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tained the element of purchase tax, it could not be said that it was the correct value of the closing stock. The Tribunal was therefore justified in directing the Income-tax Officer to look into the matter. We do not find any question of law arising out of this direction which according to us is fully justified by the contention raised in the case. The third point on which reference is sought rel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llate Tribunal to state a case and refer the following question of law for the determination of this court under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, namely : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in finding that the assessee was entitled to a deduction of Rs. 50,000 paid to Rajan and that the provisions of section 40A(3) do not stand ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
