2013 (7) TMI 581

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Ganthimathi For the Respondent : Mr. Arun Kurian Joseph Standing Counsel for Income Tax Dept. JUDGMENT (The Judgment of the Court was made by Chitra Venkataraman, J.) The following substantial questions of law are raised by the assessees seeking admission of the present Tax Case Appeals, preferred as against the orders of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'D' Bench dated 30.01....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ount. It is matter of fact that the assessee in TC(A).No.375 of 2013, along with Stanley Rajan (Assessee in TC(A).No.376 of 2013), constituted a partnership firm. The assessees explained that these monies belonged to various people who had entrusted the same with them for getting various civil works done in respect of their house properties; they were providing artisans, carpenters, masons and oth....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tunity to the assessees to substantiate their version. 4. The Assessing Officer, hence, called upon the assessees to give evidence in support of their contention. Except for pointing out that they had withdrawn a sum of Rs.7,50,000/- each, there were no materials to show that these monies were utilised for making payments to various persons. In the background of these facts, assessment order wa....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....terials, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal held that the assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act could not be interfered. Aggrieved by the said order, the present Tax Case Appeals have been filed. 7. It may be noted that the assessees filed Miscellaneous Applications before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, contending that the cash deposits should have been treated as unexplained cash credi....