9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
- Interpretation of legal and admissible evidence to support unaccounted transactions. - Validity of Tribunal's decision to restore additions to the assessment. Analysis: The judgment pertains to a reference under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, regarding the presence of legal and admissible evidence supporting the inference of unaccounted transactions by the assessee. The assessee, a registered firm engaged in wholesale grocery business, had its turnover increased by the sales tax authorities based on seized books of account. The Assessing Officer estimated suppressed turnover at Rs. 6,00,000, resulting in an addition of Rs. 24,000 to the income. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner reduced the estimation to seven percent, and the matter reached the Appellate Tribunal through appeal and cross-objection. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal and allowed the cross-objection by the Revenue, leading to the reference question. The High Court directed the Tribunal to refer the question under section 256(2) for opinion. During the hearing, the counsel for the Department argued that the issue was purely factual, while the assessee's counsel emphasized the court's direction to refer the question. The High Court, citing precedent, highlighted its discretion to decline answering questions that are academic or do not directly impact the dispute between the parties. It noted that the referred question was factual in nature, leading to the decision not to answer it. Consequently, the reference was returned unanswered, with instructions to transmit the judgment to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Gauhati Bench. The judgment underscores the High Court's authority to refuse to address questions that are not legally significant or directly relevant to the dispute at hand, even if initially directed to do so.
|
