TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (3) TMI 1550
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in the earlier round of appeal. These were considered by the Tribunal as not sufficient for making any addition under the Income Tax Act. Respectfully following the precedent as emanating from the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court judgment cited supra, we cannot take any view which is divergent to the view earlier taken by the Tribunal. 28. As regards the plea of the learned Departmental Representative that the matter may again be remanded to the files of the Assessing Officer, we do not find any merit in it. The matter has already once been remanded by the Tribunal. Six years have elapsed in between, the remission has filed to serve the purpose. In this regard, we draw support from third member decision in the case of Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Vs.Anima Investment Ltd. (2000) 73 ITD 125 for the proposition that, "The powers of the Tribunal in the matter of setting aside an assessment are large and wide, but these cannot be exercised to allow the Assessing Officer an opportunity to patch up the weak part of his case and to fill up the omission. A party guilty of remissness and gross negligence is not entitled to indulgence being shown. Apart from the aforesaid wh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Rs. 1.00 crore. 14. For the above reasons, I held that the assessee's arguments relating to his taxability of the income from the 14 concerns and the proportionate share of profits to be assessed in his hand as an alternate argument are not acceptable and they are accordingly rejected. As discussed above, it is held that the profits arising out of the business transactions of the 14 concerns are rightly assessable in the hands of the assessee and Shri.T.Devanathan jointly and that assessee's share of profit therefrom is estimated at 50%. The assessee's 50% share of quantum of net income after allowing deductions for all expenses is quantified at Rs. 1.00 crore as discussed above. 15.1. In the proposal letter issued to the assessee, the assessee's objections, it any, were called for to repeat the following additionals made in the block assessment completed earlier relating to the asst.years 1990-91, 1994-95 and 1995-96 falling within the block period. Asst. year 1990-91 Rs. 2,16,274/- 1994-95 Rs. 2,67,200/- 1995-96 Rs. 1,44,280/p 15.2. In his letter dated 21.03.2002 the assessee has not raised any objection for the addition of Rs. 2,16,274/- for the ass....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... firms being fictitious and that A2 and A3 had committed the offence of forgery by introducing these persons to the bank. Prosecution has not come forward to prove the fact by way of adducing expert opinion as to who had signed on behalf of the 14 firms for its account opening forms. 33.In the absence of any conclusive evidence that 96, Luz Church Road, Mylapore was the address of 14 firms, the charge of forgery as against A2 and A3 has necessarily been failed. One another reason for coming to this conclusion is that in the agreement the address given by the firms are different than 96, Luz Church Road, Mylapore. There has been no investigation to this effect either from the neighbour or from any of the departments that 96 Luz Church Road, Mylapore was in exclusive possession of A2 and therefore, charge against him must necessarily fail. 34.In order to establish loss to the Government, the Investigating Officer had filed statements IIA, IIB and IIC along with the charge sheet though it was not brought in evidence to show as to how much was the loss. 35.Further, in order to establish the fact that the sarees and dhoties supplied by 14 firms at inflated rates and inferior mater....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of VAO, Tahsildar or beneficiaries that were supplied with inferior quality of sarees and dhotis and therefore, the charge of loss to the Government is only hypothetical in nature and there is not even an iota of evidence with regard to the loss suffered due to the supply of substandard material. 40.On a careful consideration of reasons stated above and also considering the infirmities found in the prosecution case, this Court is of the view that the conviction and sentence passed by the learned XIII Additional/Special Judge in Spl.C.C.6 of 1997, dated 15.03.2001 against the appellants is not sustainable in law and hence the same is liable to be set aside. The bail bonds if any shall stand cancelled. 41.Accordingly, all these appeals are allowed." 5. The present Income Tax Appeal by Revenue was admitted by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court on the following substantial questions of law: "(i) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the information gathered by another investigating agency and confirmed by the Special Court as not sufficient basis for making addition under the Income Tax Act? (ii) Whether in the facts and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vide order 02.03.2000 and the learned Tribunal while passing the subsequent order impugned before us on 30.06.2006 has taken note of the earlier remand order but still not accepting the request of the Revenue to remand the present case also back to the Assessing Authority, in case the Tribunal felt that the findings by the Assessing Authority were not sufficient. 10. As far as acquittal of the accused persons in the Criminal Proceeding is concerned, it cannot be said to be amounting to automatic deletion of income, added in the hands of the Assessee in the present case under the Income Tax Act. Two proceedings, one under the Income Tax and another in Criminal prosecution operate in different fields and there is no doubt that the material collected during the course of criminal proceeding can also be used by the Authorities in the Income Tax proceedings also. But, the question is that the Appellate Authority should arrive at its own independent findings of fact on the basis of such material after issuing notice to the Assessee, giving him an opportunity to controvert the material against him. Therefore, mere acquittal of the Assessee along with other two co-accused by High Court, a....