9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (10) TMI 188X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e court was delivered by K. SREEDHAR RAO J.- Both the appeals are heard together since they involve similar questions of law and facts between the same parties. 2. The respondent-assessee is a nursing home with facility for in-patient treatment. The assessee has on its panel as many as 36 visiting doctors who were specialists in various fields of medicine. The intelligence wing conducted a raid. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessee. 3. The assessee in the enquiry examined only some of the visiting specialists who are signatories to the joint statement. The said specialists have supported the version in the joint statement. The Assessing Officer comes to the conclusion that all the visiting specialists are not examined, therefore, the amounts shown to have been collected to their account is disallowed for deduction a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ther the Tribunal was correct in holding that it was the burden on the Revenue to show that a sum of Rs. 3,52,895 reflected in the accounts of the assessee belongs to the assessee by ignoring the presumptive value contemplated under sections 68 to 69B of the Act which shifted the burden on the assessee to demonstrate that this income did not belong to the assessee." 6. Sri M. V. Sheshachala, coun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nts and that the amount collected by them is not charged to the accounts of the assessee. The said statement gets prima facie credibility. Merely because the assessee has examined some of the specialists is not a ground to reject the statement of other specialists who are not examined. In the joint statement, the names and addresses of the specialists is given in detail. The Assessing Officer shou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
