In The Commissioner Of Income Tax-Iv v. Gujarat Phenolic Synthetics, the High Court (2008) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTIONINCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1375 OF 2007
The Commissioner of Income Tax-IV ... AppellantVs.Gujarat Phenolic Synthetics... Respondents(P) Ltd.
Mr. P.S. Sahadevan for Appellant.Mr. Atul K. Jasani for Respondents.
1)Heard learned counsel for the Appellantand the respondents.
2)Perused the order of Tribunal.InParagraph no. 5, the Tribunal has recorded thefinding that the unsecured loans were admittedlyreceived from the directors and the only reasonfor treating these loans as unexplained cashcredits is that the assessee was not able tofurnish the income tax assessment particulars ofthe relevant persons before the assessing officer.However, on the basis of the other particulars
furnished by the assessee the Tribunal held thatthe C.I.T.(A) ought to have deleted the entireadditions.
3)Thus the finding recorded by the Tribunalthat the loans received have been properlyexplained is a finding of fact. We do not findsubstantial questions of law arising from theorder of the Tribunal. Hence, appeal standsdismissed.
( DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN, J.)
( J.P. DEVADHAR, J.)
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.