1991 (2) TMI 102

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of the Act on March 30, 1989, in relation to the following items of properties : Movable properties : Investments : Rs. M/s. N. K. Textiles Industries Ltd. 10,000.00 500 shares of M/s. Portico Business Pvt. Ltd. (Distinctive Nos. 15941 to 16440) 100 shares of M/s. Marudhara (India) Pvt. Ltd. (Distinctive Nos. 01201 to 01300) 600 shares of Deshapriya Estate Ltd. (Distinctive Nos. 289751 to 290350) 500 shares of M. Lal and Co. Ltd. (Distinctive Nos. 192251 to 192750) Deshapriya Estate Ltd. (Distinctive Nos. 289751 to 290350) Loans and advances : M/s. Marudhara (India) Pvt. Ltd. 21, Kalakar Street, Calcutta-70 56,750.00 M/s. Fortico Business Pvt. Ltd. 21, Kalakar Street, Calcutta-70 10,196.00 Refund of tax deducted at....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lity being unsecured loans raised from Smt. Ginni Devi Agarwalla. In the balance-sheet for the immediately preceding accounting period, two unsecured loans of Rs. 25,729 and Rs. 7,163 are shown to have been raised from Smt. Chanda Devi Agarwalla and Shri Kahnaiyalal Agarwalla, respectively. As the assessment for this period was made under Summary Assessment Scheme, there was no occasion for the assessing authority to have scrutinised, investigated or examined the genuineness of the two cash credits introduced in the books of account as unsecured loans in spite of the fact that the appellant had filed letters of confirmation along with his return of income. The appellant produced no other evidence before the Competent Authority to establish ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y [1990] 185 ITR 605,wherein it has been held (p. 608) : "No doubt section 21 categorically states that no finding of any officer or authority under any other law shall be conclusive and hence not binding on the Competent Authority. But that does not mean that a finding of other public authorities like the Income-tax Officer has no evidentiary value whatsoever. Whenever an appellant puts forth the finding of an Income-tax Officer as evidence in support of his contentions, the Competent Authority may not be justified in brushing it aside particularly in the absence of any positive evidence to the contrary. The Competent Authority cannot invoke section 21 only to negative a plea of the appellant which otherwise is supported by an order of th....