Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

8. The learned authorised representative of assessee has contended that the learned CIT(A), while ignoring the judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of L.K. Advani, observed that the Indian Evidence Act is not applicable to proceedings under the IT Act which is not correct inasmuch as the broad principles of Evidence Act do apply in the proceedings under IT Act and the same have been applied by Hon'ble Supreme Court, High Courts and Tribunals. It has been contended that the said principles have been applied by various Tribunals including in the cases of (a) Unique Organization v. Dy. CIT (2001) 70 TTJ (AM) 131 (b) Pratanna Construction v. Dy. CIT (2001) 70 TTJ (And) 122 (c) T.S. Venkatesan v. Asstt. CIT (2000) 69 TTJ (Cal) 66 : (2000) 74 ITD 298 (Cal), and that in the aforesaid cases the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CBI v. V.C. Shukla 3 SCC 410 has been followed while dealing with evidentiary value of loose sheet on the basis of which tax liability is fastened on the assessee.