1996 (3) TMI 77

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....was just and warranted ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on a perusal of paragraph 4 of the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) which shows that the assessee's explanation was that the deposits at Calicut were the withdrawals of partners from the assessee on earlier days, the Tribunal is right in fact and in law in holding that the explanation of the assessee that the amounts were withdrawn from bank account of the assessee on February 18, 1982, and deposited the same at Calicut on the same day was before the Assessing Officer and is not the above finding factually wrong and the order, based on baseless facts, vitiated ? 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nfirmatory letters and these two withdrawals were withdrawals for making remittance into the State Bank of Mysore, Calicut, on the same day ? (ii) therefore, it cannot be said that the assessee had offered a new explanation ? " Having seen the three orders as well as the impugned order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal rejecting the application of the Department praying for a reference, holding that the Tribunal has entered a concurrent finding that the deposits stood explained and there was only a clerical mistake in making entries in the books of account which too was subsequently rectified and, therefore, there is no error of any kind, we are not inclined to take any other view than the one taken by the Appellate Tribunal refusi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d appellate authority (the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal) also accepted the same explanation by observing that the amounts were withdrawn from their bank account on February 18, 1982, and the said amount came to be deposited on the same day at Calicut. This was in the nature of a correcting entry which was made on March 1, 1982. The Department's counsel had a quarrel with regard to the factual aspect as to whether these aspects were already on record and were present with the Assessing Officer. Learned counsel took us through the impugned order of the Tribunal as the second appellate authority, especially paragraph 7 onwards of the said order. Reading the order of the second appellate authority, it would be found that the Tribunal has....