IT : Where assessee had failed to explain credit in question to be related to sale of goods; addition of said amount as cash credit was to be sustained
IT : Where assessee's appeal was partly allowed by Commissioner (Appeals) and in revenue's appeal before Tribunal, issues assailed by assessee were not challenged at behest of revenue, assessee could not challenge issues against him by filing an application under section 27 of ITAT rules
■■■
[2014] 51 taxmann.com 137 (Punjab & Haryana)
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Self Knitting Works
v.
Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle, Ludhiana*
AJAY KUMAR MITTAL AND JASPAL SINGH, JJ.
IT APPEAL NO.138 OF 2014†
JULY 11, 2014
Section 68, read with section 145 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Cash credits (Sale of goods) - Assessment year 2005-06 - Assessee contended that stocks which had deteriorated because of prolonged storage for want of export orders, were sold in lots against cash receipts to realize blocked funds - Tribunal, noticed that in relevant sale bills there was no mention of any quantity sold - Name of parties to whom goods were sold was also missing - There were totalling errors in each bill and mode of transportation of those goods also could not be explained by assessee - Tribunal concluded that genuineness of transaction could not be established and relevant credit of Rs. 37.30 lakhs in profit and loss account was as cash credit in nature of cash credit - Whether Tribunal was justified in sustaining addition - Held, yes [Para 6] [In favour of revenue]
Section 255 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 read with rule 27 of the Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 - Appellate tribunal - Procedure of (Rule 27 of ITAT Rules) - Assessment year 2005-06 - Commissioner (Appeals) partly allowed assessee's appeal while making certain disallowance and addition - Revenue filed appeal before Tribunal - Assessee filed application under rule 27 of ITAT rules to assail that part of order of Commissioner (Appeals) that was decided against it - However, disallowance or addition made by Commissioner (Appeals) were not under challenge before Tribunal at behest of revenue - Whether only remedy available with assessee was to either file separate appeal or agitate issue by way of cross-objections in appeal filed by revenue - Held, yes [Para 10] [In favour of revenue]
IT : Where assessee's appeal was partly allowed by Commissioner (Appeals) and in revenue's appeal before Tribunal, issues assailed by assessee were not challenged at behest of revenue, assessee could not challenge issues against him by filing an application under section 27 of ITAT rules
■■■
[2014] 51 taxmann.com 137 (Punjab & Haryana)
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Self Knitting Works
v.
Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle, Ludhiana*
AJAY KUMAR MITTAL AND JASPAL SINGH, JJ.
IT APPEAL NO.138 OF 2014†
JULY 11, 2014
Section 68, read with section 145 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Cash credits (Sale of goods) - Assessment year 2005-06 - Assessee contended that stocks which had deteriorated because of prolonged storage for want of export orders, were sold in lots against cash receipts to realize blocked funds - Tribunal, noticed that in relevant sale bills there was no mention of any quantity sold - Name of parties to whom goods were sold was also missing - There were totalling errors in each bill and mode of transportation of those goods also could not be explained by assessee - Tribunal concluded that genuineness of transaction could not be established and relevant credit of Rs. 37.30 lakhs in profit and loss account was as cash credit in nature of cash credit - Whether Tribunal was justified in sustaining addition - Held, yes [Para 6] [In favour of revenue]
Section 255 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 read with rule 27 of the Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 - Appellate tribunal - Procedure of (Rule 27 of ITAT Rules) - Assessment year 2005-06 - Commissioner (Appeals) partly allowed assessee's appeal while making certain disallowance and addition - Revenue filed appeal before Tribunal - Assessee filed application under rule 27 of ITAT rules to assail that part of order of Commissioner (Appeals) that was decided against it - However, disallowance or addition made by Commissioner (Appeals) were not under challenge before Tribunal at behest of revenue - Whether only remedy available with assessee was to either file separate appeal or agitate issue by way of cross-objections in appeal filed by revenue - Held, yes [Para 10] [In favour of revenue]
No comments:
Post a Comment