TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2001 (3) TMI 61
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er of the Assessing Officer in proceedings under section 143(3) of the Act. The appellant is a partnership firm engaged in the sale and purchase of iron scrap wholesale. The assessment year under consideration is the assessment year 1991-92. For the said year, the appellant disclosed its income at Rs. 1,83,454. The assessment was completed determining the income of the appellant at Rs. 16,45,416. This figure was arrived at by making additions under section 69 of the Act to the tune of Rs. 10,05,000 being loans received from different parties and the interest paid thereon amounting to Rs. 24,079. The Assessing Officer also made additions disallowing the freight charges claimed by the appellant-assessee with which we are not concerned in t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bsp; 1,40,000 15,106 (2) Mr. Doulath Khan 30,000 2,697 (3) Mr. Salman 25,000 (4) Mr. Shamsuddin 25,000 (5) Bombay Agencies ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....A of the Act. It need hardly be emphasised that an appeal shall lie to the High Court under section 260A of the Act from every order passed in the appeal by the Appellate Tribunal, if the High Court is satisfied that the case involves a substantial question of law. In Sir Chunilal V. Mehta and Sons Ltd. v. Century Spinning and Manufacturing Co. Ltd., AIR 1962 SC 1314 and Pankaj Bhargava v. Mohinder Nath, AIR 1991 SC 1233, the Supreme Court has expressed the view that the proper test for determining whether a question of law raised in a case is substantial or not would be whether it is of general public importance or whether it directly and substantially affects the rights of the parties and if so, whether it is either an open question in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the alleged credits including the one which is the subject-matter of this appeal. As the aforesaid confirmatory letters could not be admitted at the appellate stage in view of rule 46A(3) of the Income-tax Rules, 1962, those confirmatory letters were forwarded by the appellate authority to the Assessing Officer with a direction to submit a report on the genuineness or otherwise of the cash credits. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer made enquiry in that regard and submitted a report to the appellate authority. In the report submitted by the Assessing Officer as regards the cash credit of Rs. 1,40,000 in the name of Mrs. Mehrunnisa, it is reported as under: "It was the assessee's claim that Mrs. Mehrunnisa loaned out to the assessee to t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as decided the above issue against the assessee. As far as the cash credit of Rs. 1,40,000 in favour of one Mehrunnisa, the Assessing Officer recorded a statement from her. At the time of enquiry by the Assessing Officer, she could not furnish any details with regard to the said loan and has further stated that all the transactions had been looked after by her husband. Since the explanation offered by Mehrunnisa was not convincing, the Assessing Officer disallowed this sum of Rs. 1,40,000. As far as the cash credit of Rs. 1,40,000 in the name Mehrunnisa is concerned, there is no acceptable evidence on the side of the assessee to prove the said cash credit..." Firstly, the above finding recorded by the Assessing Officer, the Commission....