Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2014 (9) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2014 (9) TMI 690 - HC - Income Tax


Issues Involved:
1. Whether the tribunal erred in law in holding that share income of the appellant from the firm, which had filed its return of income, was undisclosed income within the meaning of section 158B(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 under Chapter XIVB.
2. Whether the deductions under Chapter VIA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are to be given from the income computed as undisclosed income under Chapter XIVB thereof.
3. Whether the non-disclosure of income exempted under Section 10 of the Act, and which would not form part of the "total income," can be treated as undisclosed income within the meaning of section 158B(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 under Chapter XIVB.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Tribunal's Error in Holding Share Income as Undisclosed Income:
The assessee contended that since the firm had filed its return of income disclosing the share income, the share income could not be treated as "undisclosed income" under section 158B(b) of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, holding that it was the assessee who was required to disclose the income, and the firm's filing did not amount to disclosure by the assessee. The High Court, however, found that the share income received from the firm, which was exempt under Section 10(2) of the Act and not forming part of the "total income," could not be treated as "undisclosed income." The Court relied on the Supreme Court's decision in Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax v. A.R. Enterprises, which stated that non-disclosure of income not assessable or chargeable to tax could not be treated as "undisclosed income."

2. Deductions Under Chapter VIA:
The judgment did not provide a detailed analysis on this specific issue, as the primary focus was on whether the share income could be treated as undisclosed income. However, the implication from the Court's reasoning suggests that if the share income is not considered "undisclosed income," the question of deductions under Chapter VIA may not arise in this context.

3. Non-disclosure of Exempt Income:
The High Court formulated an additional substantial question of law regarding whether non-disclosure of income exempt under Section 10 of the Act could be treated as "undisclosed income." The Court held that since the share income was exempt and not required to be included in the "total income," its non-disclosure could not be treated as "undisclosed income." The Court emphasized that only income assessable and chargeable to tax could be considered "undisclosed income." The decision was aligned with the Supreme Court's interpretation in A.R. Enterprises, which clarified that "undisclosed income" must be assessable and chargeable to tax.

Conclusion:
The High Court concluded that the non-filing of the return and non-disclosure of the share income received by the assessee from the firm was wrongly treated as "undisclosed income" under section 158B(b) of the Act. Consequently, the block assessment proceedings were deemed non est. The Court answered the additional question in favor of the assessee and against the revenue, allowing the tax appeal to the extent that the share income could not be treated as "undisclosed income." No costs were awarded.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates