Skip to content


Ramsing and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectDirect Taxation
CourtMadhya Pradesh High Court
Decided On
Case NumberMiscellaneous Civil Case No. 98 of 1981
Judge
Reported in(1984)40CTR(MP)108; [1984]146ITR166(MP)
ActsIncome Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 256(2)
AppellantRamsing and Co.
RespondentCommissioner of Income-tax
Appellant AdvocateK.R. Mandoura, Adv.
Respondent AdvocateR.C. Mukati, Adv.
Excerpt:
.....and heavily on him to prove his innocence. conviction of appellant is liable to be set aside. - 1. bherulalkanhaiyalal 8,000 (+) interest 680 2. kanhaiyalalhiranand lala 9,200 (+) interest 413 3. ganpatlal mahabir 12,000 (+) interest 1,140 the ito was not satisfied regarding the genuineness of the above cash credits. the appeal preferred by the assessee before the commissioner (appeals) was unsuccessful in regard to the aforesaid cash credits. in regard to the cash credit in the name of ganpatlal mahavir, the tribunal confirmed the finding of the ito that the assessee failed to show that the aforesaid cash credit was genuine......the relevant accounting year being the financial year 1974-75, the ito noticed the following cash credits in the accounts of the assessee;nameamountrs.1. bherulalkanhaiyalal8,000(+) interest6802. kanhaiyalalhiranand lala9,200(+) interest4133. ganpatlal mahabir12,000(+) interest1,140the ito was not satisfied regarding the genuineness of the above cash credits. he, therefore, required the assessee to prove their genuineness. after considering the materials placed by the assessee, the ito held that the cash credits were not genuine and the amount of cash credit was added as the assessee's income from undisclosed sources. the appeal preferred by the assessee before the commissioner (appeals) was unsuccessful in regard to the aforesaid cash credits. on further appeal, the tribunal.....
Judgment:

Vijayvargiya, J.

1. By this application under Section 256(2) of the I.T. Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the applicant has prayed that the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal he directed to state a case and refer questions of law arising out of 'the order of the Tribunal dated April 16, 1980, passed in I.T.A. No. 584/Ind./79.

2. The facts giving rise to this application briefly stated are as follows : While framing the assessment of the assessee for the assessment: year 1975-76, the relevant accounting year being the financial year 1974-75, the ITO noticed the following cash credits in the accounts of the assessee;

Name

Amount

Rs.

1. BherulalKanhaiyalal

8,000

(+) Interest

680

2. KanhaiyalalHiranand Lala

9,200

(+) Interest

413

3. Ganpatlal Mahabir

12,000

(+) Interest

1,140

The ITO was not satisfied regarding the genuineness of the above cash credits. He, therefore, required the assessee to prove their genuineness. After considering the materials placed by the assessee, the ITO held that the cash credits were not genuine and the amount of cash credit was added as the assessee's income from undisclosed sources. The appeal preferred by the assessee before the Commissioner (Appeals) was unsuccessful in regard to the aforesaid cash credits. On further appeal, the Tribunal directed the ITO to consider afresh the question of genuineness of the cash credits standing in the names of Bherulal Kanhaiyalal and Kanhaiyalal Hiranand. In regard to the cash credit in the name of Ganpatlal Mahavir, the Tribunal confirmed the finding of the ITO that the assessee failed to show that the aforesaid cash credit was genuine. The assessee's application for reference to this court of the questions of law arising out of the order of the Tribunal was also dismissed by the Tribunal. Hence the assessee has submitted this application.

3. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties we have come to the conclusion that this application deserves to be dismissed.

4. As stated above in regard to the cash credits in the name of Bherulal Kanhaiyalal and Kanhaiyalal Hiranand, the Tribunal directed the ITO to consider the said matter afresh. In regard to the cash credit in the name of Ganpatlal Mahavir on a consideration of the material placed on record the Tribunal recorded a finding of fact that it was not proved to be genuine. This is a finding of fact and no question of law arises out of the order of the Tribunal. We, therefore, see no reason to allow this application.

5. As a result of the discussion aforesaid the application is dismissed. In the circumstances, the parties shall bear their own costs of this application.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //