TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1982 (4) TMI 43
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2,706 had not been incurred for loading and unloading is vitiated on account, of the fact that it is based on unwarranted assumptions, and on inadmissible evidence and failure to consider relevant material ?" The facts briefly stated are these. The assessee, Sir Shadilal Sugar and General Mills Ltd., Mansurpur, is a limited company and is engaged in the manufacture and sale of sugar. For the assessment year 1961-62, the accounting period ending June 30, 1960, in its assessment to income-tax the assessee claimed an expenditure of Rs. 1,60,67,168 under the head "Raw materials consumption account ". This amount included a sum of Rs. 3,02,027 being commission paid to the following loading and unloading contractors., 1. Anand Prakash, 2. Chat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the addition. He did not rely on the statement of Dharam Prakash for the reason that he had been dismissed by the assessee from its service and, therefore, was a disgruntled person. He relied on the evidence which had been given by some of the contractors on behalf of the assessee in which it was stated that the assessee had not deducted any amount from their bills in respect of shortage. Aggrieved, the Revenue filed an appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal at first appraised itself of the concept of admissible evidence " and " relevant evidence with reference to some authorities and then proceeded to reappraise the material which was on record of the case. The Department was found in possession of fortnightly and final statements in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....respect of these parties, these parties would not simply rely upon the ipse dixit of what has been recorded by the assessee. Had these parties proved from any note book or any accounts corroborating the entries of accounts of the assessee, then it would have been possible to weigh the evidence in favour of the assessee. Besides, another important factor is to be noted. It is true that equity and income-tax are strangers. But the maxim of 'Equity' cannot be ignored while considering the persuasive force of evidence. One of the general maxims of equity is that he who seeks equity must come with clean hands. In the instant case, the assessee conceded that in respect of insurance rebate, what Dharam Prakash and other employees had recorded is c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e contractors and if subsequently it was embezzled by its employees, it cannot be held responsible. We find no substance in this contention. It was not raised on behalf of the assessee at any stage either before the ITO or before the AAC or even before the Tribunal. In other words, this contention does not arise out of the Tribunal's order. Since it involves a consideration of facts, it cannot be entertained for the first time in reference. Apart from this it is not found embraced in the question referred to us. The position, pure and simple, is that on a re-appraisal of the evidence and the material on record, the Tribunal recorded a finding which was different from the one recorded by the AAC. It cannot be disputed that the Tribunal is th....