TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1984 (6) TMI 122
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e in their book on Negotiable Instruments Act by Bhashyam and Adiga, 14th edition as follows : " The High Court of Bombay in Maturi Sanyasilingam v. Exchange Bank of India & Africa Ltd. AIR 1948 Bom. 1 and Haji Sheikh Hasanoo v. S. Natesa Mudliar & Co. AIR 1959 Bom. 267 has taken the view that a demand draft issued by a bank on its branch or vice versa is not a cheque nor a bill of exchange while the other High Courts in Suganchand & Co. v. Brahmayya & Co. AIR 1951 Mad. 910, Pt. Sidh Nath Shukla v. Punjab National Bank of India Ltd. AIR 1960 All. 238 and State Bank of India v. Jyoti Ranjan Mazumdar AIR 1970 Cal. 503 have held that it is a bill of exchange and is very nearly allied to a cheque. Having regard to the definitions contained in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Act on 23-2-1979. However, it was reopened Under section 143(2) of the Act. The ITO proposed to add more than Rs. 1 lakh to the returned income. Hence, he issued a draft assessment order to the assessee on 4-3-1981. After considering the assessee's objections dated 26-3-1981, the IAC's instructions dated 23-4-1981 were issued to the ITO and the assessment was completed according to those instructions. The assessee found to have borrowed moneys from hundis and was found to have repaid the same by demand drafts. The ITO held that the repayments as per the requirements under section 69D should be through account payee cheque. However, it was argued before the ITO that there is not much difference between the payment by demand draft and paym....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....much as in this case the loan was said to have been repaid through a bank draft, the principal as well as the interest said to have been paid on this loan have to be treated as the assessee's deemed income under section 69D and, thus, he affirmed the addition. 4. We heard Shri B.S. Murthy, the learned counsel for the assessee, and Shri B.P.R. Naik, the learned departmental representative. Almost the same contentions which were advanced before the learned Commissioner (Appeals) were also reiterated by both sides before us. After hearing the arguments, we are inclined to accept the plea advanced on behalf of the assessee in view of the preponderant authority available to the assessee. Except the Bombay High Court all other High Courts had ta....