Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1991 (9) TMI 31

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... essee has any burden to further establish the source of that creditor ? 2. Whether the Tribunal was not bound by its earlier order of remand and if so, whether the Tribunal was justified in ignoring the legal effect of the proved repayment of the credit to the creditor as ruled in its earlier order ? 3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the two cash credits of Rs. 75,000 in the name of Smt. K. Pathukutty Umma and Rs. 25,000 in the name of Sri V. Abdukutty were not genuine, but constituted the undisclosed income of the assessee ? 4. Whether the findings of the Tribunal referred to in question No. 3 supra were arrived at by ignoring an essential matter, namely, the repaymen .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... , but held that the two credits appearing in the names of Smt. Pathukutty Uma (Rs. 75,000) and Shri V. Abdukutty (Rs. 25,000) were not proved to be genuine loans. They were sustained. The assessee carried the matter by way of appeal before the Appellate Tribunal. By order dated January 27, 1988, the Appellate Tribunal sustained the two cash credits, Rs. 75,000 in the name of Smt. Pathukutty Umma and Rs. 25,000 in the name of Shri V. Abdukutty. It is thereafter that the assessee formulated the above four questions of law, in the application filed under section 256(2) of the Act, for reference to this court. The Appellate Tribunal considered the matter exhaustively and, by order dated August 30, 1989, held that the two cash credits were not s .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... has held so. That precise finding which is one of fact is not assailed by framing an appropriate question. After the remit by the Appellate Tribunal and in conformity with the directions given by it, in its order dated January 30, 1979, the first appellate authority considered the entire matter over again, accepted the cash credits with regard to the two transactions and held that the two other transactions in the names of Smt. Pathukutty Umma and Shri Abdukutty were not proved to be genuine loans. It is this decision which was taken in appeal by the assessee before the Appellate Tribunal and the Appellate Tribunal considered the matter on merits and found that no interference is called for with the order passed by the Commissioner of Incom .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... identity of the creditor but the creditworthiness of the creditor and the genuineness of the transactions have not been proved. The Appellate Tribunal further found that the credit in the name of Shri Abdukutty stands on the same footing as that of Smt. Pathukutty Umma and, in the light of the finding that the creditworthiness of the creditors have not been proved, the addition of Rs. 75,000 and Rs. 25,000 sustained by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) did not merit any interference in appeal. We should state that the above findings entered by the Appellate Tribunal are pure findings of fact. It cannot be doubted that it is for the assessee to prove the identity of the creditor as also the creditworthiness. The genuineness of the t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ny specific instance whereby any specific direction or finding by the Appellate Tribunal in the earlier order dated January 30, 1979, was deviated or departed from. Indeed, the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) after remit is in accord with the directions given by the Appellate Tribunal in its order dated January 30, 1979, and it is the said order that was confirmed in appeal by the Appellate Tribunal. Question No. 2, formulated in the original petition, does not arise and the orders passed after the remit are in accord with the order of remand. We are of the opinion that no referable question of law arises out of the appellate order passed by the Appellate Tribunal dated January 27, 1988. The original petition is .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates