9911796707
TMI Blog1986 (3) TMI 6X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... MUKHERJEE. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by SABYASACHI MUKHARJI J.- These appeals are by certificate from the decision of the High Court of Bombay dated June 21, 1973, whereby the High Court had declined the application made under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called " the Act "), wherein the assessee sought two questions to be referred to the High Court, The questions were : "(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the reassessment proceedings under section 147(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, initiated by the Income-tax Officer for the assessment years 1955-56 to 1962-63 against the assessee were valid in law ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumsta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ruly disclosed. The assessee's case was that a partnership business carried on by M/s. Indo-Aden Salt Works Co. was taken over by the assessee by an agreement dated August 24, 1949, and during the assessment year 1950-51 the said agreement dated August 24, 1949, as well as the valuation report, had been filed before the assessing authority. It is further the, case of assessee that there was discussion on this valuation report. It further appears from the assessment order and the affidavit that the valuation report was discussed and the amount of depreciation was more or less agreed to between the parties. The Revenue's case, on the other hand, is that, which portion of the assets consisted of masonry work and which of earth work were not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on at 6% is available only in respect of such assets as are constructed of masonry and not if made of earth. It was also not in dispute that depreciation on piers is available at 12% only if constructed entirely or mainly of wood. The fact that for the assessment years 1955-56 to 1962-63, excessive depreciation allowance had been allowed in the original assessments and income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment and/or was underassessed for these years was also not in dispute. The only question, therefore, is, whether there was failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment and further whether such income had escaped assessment and whether such escapement or underassessment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... idayatullah J., as the learned Chief justice then was, observed in Calcutta Discount Co.'s case [1961] 41 ITR 191 (SC) that mere production of evidence before the Income-tax Officer was not enough, that there may be omission or failure to make a true and full disclosure, if some material for the assessment lay embedded in the evidence which the Revenue could have uncovered but did not, then it is the duty of the assessee to bring it to the notice of the assessing authority. The assessee knows all the material and relevant facts-the assessing authority might not. In respect of the failure to disclose, the omission to disclose may be deliberate or inadvertent. That was immaterial. But if there is omission to disclose material facts, then, sub ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
