TMI Blog2020 (5) TMI 213X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n ble High Court and no finding has been recorded by the Hon ble High Court in terms of any perversity in the order so passed by the Tribunal which has been passed after considering the material available on record. The Hon ble High Court has also held that The Court is also of the view that the initial burden of showing that the transaction had not taken place and statement made earlier was wholly incorrect or that the documents recovered did not support the findings, was not dislodged. We therefore find that the findings of facts of the Tribunal have been affirmed by the Hon ble High Court and in such circumstances, there is no basis for entertaining the present Misc. Application so filed by the assessee u/s 254(2). Misc. Applications s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , the order has been passed by the Hon ble Rajasthan High Court dated 16.09.2019 wherein appeal of the assessee against the order passed by the Tribunal has been dismissed stating that no question of law arises. It was submitted that the Hon ble High Court has not admitted the appeal due to the reasons. The issue is question of fact and no substantial question of law is involved in such cases. In such a case, the order of the Tribunal does not merge with the dismissal order of the Hon ble High Court and the Tribunal can still entertain the rectification application and in support, reliance was placed on certain decisions. 4. Per contra, the ld. DR referred to the findings of the Tribunal and submitted that the Tribunal has taken into con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is brother Shri Vijay Makhija, and Kapil Marwah wherein the latter three persons have joined hands as partners in running of the mine owned by Shri Jagdish Panjwani and share of their respective profits and losses have been stated therein. The existence and contents of the said agreement found at the premises of the assessee during the course of search remain undisputed. Shri Jagdish Panjwani in his statement recorded u/s 131 of the I.T. Act, 1961 on 09.11.2011 has also admitted that he was only the name lender and actually the investment was made by his relatives i.e. Shri Prakash Makhija and Shri Vijay Makhija. The said statement also remains unrebutted before us. Further, the retraction so made during the course of assessment proceedings ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment recorded during the course u/s 132(4) which carries the evidentiary value, the retraction made after made during the course of assessment proceedings after a considerable lapse of time which was not accepted, the post search statement, the contents of the agreement found at the premises of the assessee during the course of search. The assessee has contested the said findings of the Tribunal before the Hon ble High Court and the same has been further examined by the Hon ble High Court and no finding has been recorded by the Hon ble High Court in terms of any perversity in the order so passed by the Tribunal which has been passed after considering the material available on record. The Hon ble High Court has also held that The Court is a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
