1985 (3) TMI 31 - HC - Income Tax

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Interpretation of questions proposed in a reference application u/s 256(2).

In this judgment, the High Court of Delhi, comprising Judges D. K. Kapur and S. Ranganathan, examined five questions proposed in a reference application u/s 256(2). The court reviewed the questions, considered the Tribunal's rejection of the petition u/s 256(1), and analyzed the appellate order from which the questions of law arose.

2. Determination of the nature of questions of fact and law.

The court determined that question No. 1 was a question of fact, while question No. 2 was deemed covered by a judgment of the Supreme Court and hence did not require referral. The Tribunal's view on question No. 2 was found to align with the Income-tax Act, 1961, specifically section 52(1). The court noted that the Income-tax Officer did not hold the same view at any stage, rendering the question academic.

3. Assessment of alleged cash credit in the assessee's books.

Regarding questions Nos. 3 and 4 concerning alleged cash credits in the assessee's books, the Tribunal found that the onus had been discharged by producing supporting documents like affidavits. The court acknowledged that some persons associated with the credits were not examined by the Income-tax Officer. It was emphasized that all evidence should be on record to prevent miscarriage of justice, and the Tribunal could accept cash credits as genuine based on the available evidence.

4. Determination of ownership of half interest on bank deposits.

The court addressed the final question concerning half interest on bank deposits held jointly by a husband and wife. It was observed that there was no evidence indicating the source of the deposited money or the ownership distribution between the spouses. Given that the wife had been assessed on half the interest in a previous year and owned half the relevant property, the court concluded that no legal question arose. Consequently, the application was dismissed with costs imposed, including counsel's fee of Rs. 250.