M.M.KUMAR, J. - (1.) AMRITSAR , in ITA No. 625/Asr/1992, in respect of the asst. yr. 1982 -83. The Revenue has claimed that the following substantive question of law would arise for determination of this Court: "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Tribunal is right in law in computing the assessee's income at Rs. 55,000 as against the income of Rs. 6,18,150 estimated by the ITO -
(2.) BEFORE adverting to the submissions made on the controversy raised, few facts are necessary to notice as flows from the statement of the case. The respondent -firm was engaged in the business of purchase and sale of auto spare parts in respect of the year under reference. It had headquarter at Jalandhar and branch office at Kapurthala. There were three partners, namely, Shri Gurbax Singh, father and his two sons Sarvashri Manjit Singh and Amrik Singh. On the inspection its possession was taken by the IT Department by placing reliance on the provisions of s. 132A of the Act. In other was to be framed.
(3.) 5,65,300 was made in the assessment on account of unexplained investment, which was based on the pocket diary the provisions of s. 145(2) of the Act and the version of the assessee was rejected altogether. The CIT(A), vide its order of the Act. Accordingly, addition of Rs. 5,65,300 was confirmed. On further appeal filed by the assessee, the matter was considered by the Tribunal and it took the view that the diary seized during inspection of the premises of the assessee could not constitute a basis for making addition of Rs. (A), held as under: "16. In view of the above, the basic question would be as to what inference should be drawn on the given facts. As it is, the AO and the CIT(A) have not appreciated the assessee's contention and the written submissions that entries were imaginary particularly the fact that neither any shoguns was taken nor there was any girl by the name of Dolly in whose marriage expenses were incurred. Further no plot had been purchased on which expenses could be incurred. Again the assessee had in terms stated and asserted that not only no "Deshi Sharab Theka" had been taken by the firm or any other partners but enquiries in this regard had been made by the IT Department from the Excise Department also and not only there has been no contradiction but there is no reference to such submissions which shows that the assessee's version could not be said to be wrong and frivolous. All these facts would project that it is a case where the assessee has been a victim of circumstances most of which may be resulting from his own action but certainly the firm should not have been visited with the type of assessment framed. xx xx xx xx xx xx 18. Since we are of the considered view that entries in the diary could not be relied much less made the basis for making assessment in the assessee firm's case we are not dealing with the ground that expert assessment was not properly framed because Shri J.K. Sood, advocate, submitted that in view of rounds of litigations through which the assessee has already gone he would pray for adjudication on merits rather than once again going back to the AO." ;