Itxa/365/2006 Of M/S Mayuresh Developers v. Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Taxcentral,Mum And Anr

1 rpa IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 365 OF 2006 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 365 OF 2006 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 365 OF 2006 M/s.Mayuresh Developers .. Appellant V/s. Dy.Commissioner of Income-Tax Central Circal I, Mumbai & Ors. .. Respondents Mr.Andhyarujina with Ms.Pallavi Divekar for the Appellate. Mr.Vinod Gupta for the Respondents. P.C.:- P.C.:- . The brief facts as mentioned in the order of Tribunal which give rise to this Appeal may be narrated as below. 2. Books of account of the assessee shows that the assessee had received Rs.50 lacs each from Real Worth Impex Pvt.Ltd., and Kartika Fiscal Services Pvt.Ltd. assessee had received Rs.50 lacs each from Real Worth Impex Pvt.Ltd., and Kartika Fiscal Services Pvt.Ltd. During the course of assessment,the Assessing Officer 2 on 5th August, 1999 requested the assessee to produce the aforesaid two companies alongwith their books of accounts. The assessee did not comply with the said letter, but filed letter dated 20th September, 1999 stating that the advance received from the two companies had been transferred to the sister concern of the assessee i.e. M/s. Marathe Developers and therefore they were shown by M/s.Maratha Developers as income in its P & L account because these two companies had failed to pay the balance amount. 3. Further, it was stated that Real Worth issued a legal notice for recovery of the advance given. The Assessing Officer, therefore, wrote a letter to assessee on 21st October, 1999 to furnish full and complete address, confirmation letter and income tax Permanent Account Number of the aforesaid two companies. By the said letter the assessee was once again requested to produce their books of accounts. In response to said letter, the assessee filed a letter on 16th November, 1999 stating that it was not in a position even to locate Kartika Fiscal Services Ltd. He also stated that Real Worth had been introduced by one Mr. D.C.Sejpal, Chartered Accountant, but the details called for were not filed. 3 4. In these circumstances the Tribunal came to the conclusion that these transactions were bogus. We do not find the questions framed in the Memo of Appeal fall for consideration in the facts of the case. 5. The Appeal is, accordingly, disposed of. (BILAL NAZKI, J.) (BILAL NAZKI, J.) (S.S.SHINDE, J.) (S.S.SHINDE, J.)