This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.
Onus of ensuring presence of deponent cannot be shifted to assessee
Case Law Details
- Case Name
- Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Best Infrastructure (India) Pvt. Ltd. (Delhi High Court)
- Appeal Number
- Only available for paid members
- Date of Judgement/Order
- Only available for paid members
- Courts
- All High Courts, Delhi High Court
Upgrade to Basic or Premium to download.
Already Upgraded? Log in.
A copy of the statement of Mr. Tarun Goyal, recorded under Section 132 (4) of the Act, was not provided to the Assessees. Mr. Tarun Goyal was also not offered for the cross-examination. The remand report of the AO before the CIT(A) unmistakably showed that the attempts by the AO, in ensuring the presence of Mr. Tarun Goyal for cross-examination by the Assessees, did not succeed. The onus of ensuring the presence of Mr. Tarun Goyal, whom the Assessees clearly stated that they did not know, could not have been shifted to the Assessees. The onus was on the Revenue to ensure his presence. Apart fr...
