TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2011 (8) TMI 22
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....3/Kol/2002 for the Assessment Year 1997-1998 dismissing the appeal filed by the assessee. Being dissatisfied, the assessee has come up with the present appeal. The facts leading to filing of this appeal may be summed up thus: a) The appellant is a Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) and is an assessee under the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('Act'). For the Assessment Year 1997- 98, after the assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act was initiated, the Assessing Officer issued summons under Section 131 of the Act to Sri K. K. Pant and Sri Asharam Mohata, the alleged creditors of the assessee. Sri Pant expired before issue of notice. Sri Mohata produced relevant documents along with a forwarding letter dated 15th January, 2000 confirming the g....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....el appearing on behalf of the appellant, has vehemently contended before us that the authorities below failed to consider the fact that the appellant took loan from the above two persons by account payee cheques and that the loan- confirmation-certificates were also produced which bore signatures of those two persons as well as their permanent account numbers as income tax assessee. According to Mr. Khaitan, as K. K. Pant, one of those persons, was dead at the relevant point of time, there was no question of his appearing and the other creditor, namely, Sri Mohata, due to his cardiac-ailment could not himself appear. But he admitted the loan by responding to the summons. In such circumstances, according to Mr. Khaitan, the Assessing Officer....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....[1998] ITR Vol. 232, page 820; 3. Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Precision Finance Pvt. Ltd., reported in [1994] ITR Vol. 298, page 465. Mr. Agarwal, therefore, prays for dismissal of the appeal. After hearing the learned Counsel for the parties and after going through the materials on record, we find that the appellant allegedly took loan from those two persons by account payee cheques and the factum of such loan is also admitted by those creditors by confirming the loan account. It further appears that the appellant disclosed the names of those persons as well as the address and pursuant to that, the Assessing Officer issued notice under Section 131 of the Act. The notice sent to K. K. Pant came back with the report 'd....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e appeal before the Tribunal, the appellant took the selfsame point that the order passed by the Assessing Officer as well as the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) were illegal as the appellant could not controvert the report of the Inspector. The Tribunal below, however, also did not deal with the aforesaid question raised by the appellant and affirmed the order of the Assessing Officer. In such circumstances, we find substance in the contention of Mr. Khaitan that the order of assessment cannot be supported as the materials collected by the Assessing Officer through the Inspector which were relied upon were neither disclosed to the appellant nor was the appellant asked to explain the report submitted by the Inspector. It is n....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ficer. It appears that Pant died after Assessment Year was over and in the next Assessment Year, according to the appellant, before the death of Pant, the loan was paid back to Pant. If the information given by the Inspector that the heirs of Pant did not file any income-tax return for the relevant period was disclosed to the appellant by the Assessing Officer, the assessee could produce the heirs of the deceased to explain the position but for non-disclosure of the information given by the Income-tax Inspector to the assessee, the appellant could not get further opportunity to explain the position. Similarly, as regards the transaction with Sri Mohata, according to the Assessing Officer, the Income-tax Inspector disclosed to him ....