9911796707
TMI Blog1948 (3) TMI 33X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the assessee to this Court under Section 66(2) of the Income-tax Act the Appellate Tribunal was called upon to state a case with reference to the following question of law:― "Whether the Department was entitled to include the amount of ₹ 3,500 said to have been deposited by Kishundutt as secreted profits of the firm when it had already applied flat rates to cover suppressed in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unt of these losses was alleged to be ₹ 19,900. The Income-tax Officer ascertained the net amount of losses to be ₹ 3,861 by setting off against the sum of ₹ 19,900 three items totalling ₹ 16,039. Of these three items, one was an item of ₹ 8,300 which was entered in the suspense account in the books of the assessee's head office at Gaya. The Income-tax Officer tre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... held that it has been included in the profits of the business which had been ascertained on the flat rate basis, and that to bring it into account again amounts to double taxation. If this sum had been brought into account as profits of the ordinary trading transaction of the assessee, the assessee's contention must have been upheld. But that was not the assessee's case before the Income- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... here, in reference to the deposits attributed to Kishundutt, he says: "No evidence as to the nature of these credits is forthcoming, and there is justification for the Income-tax Officer to hold these credits to be suppressed income inasmuch as he has found that the appellant had extensive speculative business, part of the gains of which he had suppressed in various benami accounts and that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
