9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Whether the Tribunal was justified in disturbing the estimate made by the AAC regarding the amount available at the end of October 12, 1962, out of the intangible additions made in the assessee firm's assessment for the assessment year 1961-62? Detailed Analysis: The judgment pertains to a reference under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, where the Tribunal questioned the estimate made by the AAC concerning the amount available from intangible additions made in the firm's assessment for the year 1961-62. The assessee, a wholesale dealer in paper, introduced amounts in the books of the Calcutta branch for the assessment year 1965-66, which were claimed as genuine loans but rejected by the ITO. The AAC accepted the alternative plea that the deposits should be covered by intangible additions made in 1961-62. The Tribunal, however, set aside the AAC's order and restored the addition of the uncovered balance of Rs. 26,000 as the assessee's income from undisclosed sources. The Tribunal found that the intangible additions available to the assessee at the end of October 12, 1962, were significantly lower than estimated by the AAC. The Tribunal considered various amounts and determined that only Rs. 5,774 could have legitimately remained with the assessee, contrary to the AAC's calculation of Rs. 58,202. The Tribunal further assessed that a total of Rs. 19,000 may have been available, leading to the restoration of Rs. 26,000 as undisclosed income. The Tribunal's decision was based on the premise that the intangible additions made during assessment proceedings represent undisclosed income of the assessee. The Tribunal highlighted the need for the assessee to provide a clear explanation regarding the source of cash credits and failed to demonstrate that the amounts were derived from previous intangible additions. The Tribunal's detailed analysis of the available cash balance and its conclusion that only a portion of the amount could be attributed to intangible additions formed the basis for the decision against the assessee. The judgment emphasizes the Tribunal's authority to determine factual matters, with the court upholding the decision in favor of the Revenue, indicating no order as to costs.
|
