1983 (10) TMI 35 - HC - Income Tax

Summary

Issues:
1. Whether the Tribunal was right in holding there was no non-disclosure by the assessee of primary facts related to 'deemed dividends' under section 2(22)(e) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
2. Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that the Income-tax officer lacked supporting materials to initiate proceedings under section 147(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

Analysis:
The case involved a reference petition where the Revenue sought direction to the Tribunal under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, to refer specific questions for the court's opinion. The questions pertained to the non-disclosure of deemed dividends by the assessee and the jurisdiction of the Income-tax officer under section 147(a) to initiate proceedings for escaped income assessment. The Tribunal's decision was challenged, but both the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal concurred that the proceedings under section 147(a) were not valid in this case.

The assessee's assessment for the relevant year revealed that a company in which the assessee had a substantial interest had advanced a significant amount to the assessee. The Income-tax officer treated this amount as deemed dividend under section 2(22)(e) as it was not disclosed in the return of income. However, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) held that the assessee was not obligated to disclose such deemed income as per legal precedents, and therefore, section 147(a) was inapplicable. The Tribunal upheld this decision, emphasizing the duty of the assessee to disclose primary facts only, not to draw inferences from those facts.

The High Court agreed with the lower authorities, stating that the assessee had disclosed the loan from the company and the company's accumulated profits during the original assessment. The court cited legal precedents to establish that the duty of disclosure extends only to primary facts, not interpretations or inferences. The court emphasized that it was the Income-tax officer's responsibility to investigate further based on the disclosed primary facts, and the assessee was not required to guide the officer in drawing conclusions. As the primary facts were disclosed, the court found no grounds for a reference in this case and dismissed the petition, with no order as to costs.