COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX Vs. NIPPON ENTERPRISE SOUTH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) (JUDGMENT of the Court was made by K. RAVIRAJA PANDIAN,j.)The assessment year is 1993-94. The Revenue filed this appeal formulating the following question of law: "whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Tribunal is right in law in deleting the addition of Rs. 23 lakhs made on account of unexplained cash credits under Section 68 of the Income-tax Act for the assessment year 1993-94?

(2.) THE assessee is a company. In respect of the assessment year aforesaid, originally, the assessment was completed under Section 143 (3) of the Income-tax Act on 29. 03. 1996 making addition of Rs. 23 lakhs as unexplained cash credit under Section 68 of Income-tax Act. On appeal, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) set aside the order of assessment and remitted back for reassessment after giving an opportunity to the assessee to prove the transaction by producing the persons from whom the cash credit was received for examination and with further direction to the assessing officer to peruse the income-tax file of the lenders. Once again, an assessment order was made by the assessing officer rejecting all the explanations given by the assessee in respect of the disputed amount of Rs. 23 lakhs. On appeal, Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) deleted the addition relying on the order of the Appellate Tribunal in assessee's own case for the assessment year 1992-93 in I. T. A. No. 948/mds/96. The further appeal preferred by the revenue to the Tribunal was also dismissed following its own order in respect of the assessee's case for the assessment year 1992-93 on which the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) relied. As against the same, the present appeal is filed by formulating the question of law extracted above.

(3.) WHEN the matter came up for admission before this Court, this Court has adjourned the matter for more than four times so as to enable the counsel for the revenue to find out whether the revenue has taken any further action against the order of the Tribunal in respect of the assessment year 1992-93, which is followed by the Tribunal for dismissing the appeal of the revenue? However, the counsel was able to get only a letter from the Department to the effect that the file relating to the said assessment year has been handed over to the counsel for the revenue for filing an appeal before this Court. Thereafter what happened to the matter is still a mystery. Hence, we heard the learned counsel for the revenue on merits of the case for admission.