9911796707
TMI Blog1962 (2) TMI 7X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... art thereof ? (2) Whether there was any material on record to support the finding that Rs. 1,45,706 and/or Rs. 48,185 or any part thereof represent the income of the assessee ? With special leave the assessees, Messrs. C. Vasantlal & Co., have appealed to this court. The assessees carried on business as commission agents and brokers and also in forward transactions in cotton, bullion and other commodities. In the course of proceedings for assessment of income-tax of the assessees, for the assessment year 1947-48, two entries in the assessees' books of accounts for Samvat 2002 (which was the previous year for the purpose of assessment) showing payments of Rs. 48,185 and Rs. 1,45,706 to Messrs. Meghaji Kapurchand and Messrs. Bhimaji Mot ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ansactions in cotton which were entered in the books of accounts of the assessees were not genuine but the assessees had merely acted as brokers or " mediators ", Joitram Kedarnath and Bhawanji Lakhmichand having directly " bought losses " from Messrs. Meghaji Kapurchand and Messrs. Bhimaji Motiji. He, therefore, directed that an amount of Rs. 1,94,890 be excluded in computing the assessees' total income. The department appealed against the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bombay. The Tribunal reversed the order passed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and restored the order passed by the Income-tax Officer. The Tribunal under the direction of the High Court of Bombay submitted a stat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd that these transactions were genuine transactions. They merely asserted that the transactions were effected by persons " who were not available " at the time of the enquiry. (6) That Messrs. Meghaji Kapurchand and Messrs. Bhimaji Motiji had encashed the cheques issued by the assessees and admitted that they had paid back the amounts thereof. Before the Income-tax Officer they stated that the amounts of the cheques were returned by them to the assessees but before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner they stated that they had returned those amounts to " unknown and unidentifiable parties. " In the light of these findings and the refusal of the assessees to examine Joitram Kedarnath in support of their case that the latter had receiv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... payment of the amounts of the cheques was made to the assessees. Before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner they stated that they handed over the moneys to some other persons whose presence could not be procured. There is nothing on the record to show that the Income-tax Officer had not disclosed to the assessees the material he had collected by examining Achaldas and Poonamchand. In any event, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner in the interest of justice and fair play gave the assessees an opportunity to cross-examine these two persons. The Income-tax Officer is not bound by any technical rules of the law of evidence. It is open to him to collect materials to facilitate assessment even by private enquiry. But if he desires to use the ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
