1977 (4) TMI 55

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....048 on12th Oct., 1970to the State Bank ofIndiafor meeting a hundi loan. The explanation was that Radhey Shyam had deposited this amount on12th Oct., 1970in the bank for his purpose and that the source for this amount was as under: (i) Rs. 5,000 withdrawn by Radhey Shyam on 9th Oct., 1970 from the firm of M/s Khan Chand Hira Nand of Pauri. (ii) Rs. 5,048 out of cash balance of the assessee firm on12th Oct., 1970. This explanation was rejected by the ITO because the entries made in the books of account of the two firms did not support it. The Tribunal also confirmed this view of the ITO though it noted that the Pauri firm had certified that it had advanced on 12th Oct., 1970 Rs. 5,000 to the assessee firm, that the entries in its boo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the cash balance also was accordingly reduced. It was specifically pointed out to the AAC that the Pauri firm had categorically affirmed that it had advanced Rs. 5,000 to the assessee on 9th Oct., 1970 and that part of the explanation of the assessee had not been found to be false; that the Pauri firm delivered cash to Kanahaya Lal who in his turn delivered the money to Radhey Shyam, partner. But the AAC was of the view that the assessee was guilty of furnishing inaccurate particulars of income and in this view he confirmed the penalty. The assessee is in appeal. 4. Shri H.G. Malik, learned counsel, reiterated the arguments before the authorities below which had been taken in the quantum and the penalty proceedings. In particular, his gr....