TMI Blog2009 (8) TMI 4X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he finding for the year 1992-93 as it has been held that the amount related to assessment year in question - 96 of 2009 (O&M) - - - Dated:- 4-8-2009 - ADARSH KUMAR GOEL and DAYA CHAUDHARY, JJ. Mr. S. K. Mukhi, Advocate, for the assessee. JUDGMENT ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J. (Oral) - The assessee has preferred this appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, "the Act") against the order dated 6.6.2008 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi "A" Bench in ITA No. 68/DEL/2005 for the assessment year 1991-92, proposing to raise the following substantial questions of law: A. " That the order of ITAT for the year under appeal being inconsistent to that of the order of the ITAT for the subsequent assessment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of account at that time wherein the receipts received were accounted for. He also confirmed that he was not issuing receipts for cash received from customers. This statement was recorded in the presence of assessee. The assessee was afforded an opportunity to cross-examine Shri Guru Gyan Singh. In the cross-examination Shri Guru Gyan Singh reiterated that he did not possess the books of accounts as on the date. Hence, he was unable to say anything regarding the difference. He confirmed that books of accounts were written by part-time accountant as per his convenience. However, he confirmed that he used to keep accounts at that time in the financial year 1991-92. He confirmed that as on the date of statement there was no outstanding balanc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t such payment was made out of undisclosed sources and hence to be added as income under Section 69 of the Act." 3. We have heard learned counsel for the assessee. 4. Learned counsel for the assessee submits that the view taken by the Tribunal is inconsistent with its order for assessment year 1992-93 and that addition was not called for as the account of M/s Vijay Bottle Stores in whose favour credit entry was made in the accounts book of the assessee, was not properly maintained. 5. We are of the view that the matter has been duly considered concurrently by the three authorities and the addition has been made and upheld. The findings of fact so recorded cannot be held to be perverse. There was no question of inconsistency wit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
