TMI Blog1989 (3) TMI 87X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ces of the case, the Tribunal relied on inadmissible evidence and did not take into consideration all relevant material and ignored relevant material and/or acted partly on irrelevant material in coming to the finding that there was, in fact, only one transaction of rupees four lakhs on October 30, 1950, and in deleting the sum of rupees four lakhs treated by the Income-tax Officer and the Appellate Assistant Commissioner as the assessee's income from undisclosed sources and whether such finding is based on evidence which does not cover all the essential points and is contrary to and/or inconsistent with the material and evidence on record and is otherwise unreasonable and/or perverse ? (iii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstance ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o G. Yafi Sons of Bombay which in turn paid the said amount to Madaripur Trading Co. Ltd. in cash." The assessee went up in appeal to the Tribunal, where the assessee took the following stand. The learned representative for the assessee submitted that the incometax authorities were not justified in coming to the conclusion that there were in fact two transactions of Rs. 4 lakhs and not one as contended by the assessee. It was further submitted that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner had clearly gone wrong in interpreting the entry made in the assessee's books of account on October 31, 1950. It was further submitted that if the said entries were to be read with the voucher as well as the memo dated October 30, 1950, it would be very ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Appellate Assistant Commissioner and restored the case once more to his file with a direction to give his decision afresh after hearing both the parties, namely, the Income-tax Officer as well as Shri Chowdhury, inviting the attention of the Tribunal to the relevant extract from the order sheet of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner's record, it was further submitted on behalf of the assessee that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner had given time to the assessee to produce the relevant books for his examination on June 25, 1974. On June 25, 1974, on behalf of the assessee, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner was requested to give the assessee further time to bring the necessary books of account for examination thereof but the Appellate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which was not there before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. The Tribunal in its order has given sufficient reasons for examining the new evidence. It was found by the Tribunal that the evidence was unavailable to the assessee at the relevant time because of the assessment proceedings in respect of Shri Shaligram Chowdhury, which had been going on in Bombay and that is why the relevant books of account, vouchers and memos could not be produced at the relevant time fixed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, that is, on June 25, 1974, although the assessee prayed for extension of time for production of the same, but the said prayer was rejected by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. Therefore, on appraisal of the evidence produced b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
