9911796707
TMI Blog1967 (1) TMI 38X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... acting under the proviso to section 13 of the Income-tax Act of 1922, estimated his profits at 30 per cent. of the turnover resulting in an addition of Rs. 25,792.00 to the gross profits disclosed by the assessee. The opinion of the officer was confirmed on appeal both by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and later by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. The assessee moved the Tribunal under section 66(1) to refer the following question to this court : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in sustaining the addition of Rs. 25,792 made for deficiency in the gross profits disclosed by the assessee?" The Tribunal dismissed the application on the ground that no question of law ar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion of Rs. 25,792 in its entirety. The question for consideration therefore is that, whether the Tribunal has acted legally or illegally in adding the entire amount to the gross profits as returned, thereby implying that, had it acted in accordance with law, there would have been the possibility of a smaller amount being added or the Tribunal getting satisfied that the amount as originally returned by the assessee was acceptable and did not call for any addition being made thereto. It is on this footing that we have examined the position and permitted argument to be addressed. If the proviso to section 13 applies to this case, then ordinarily the only question that would remain would be one of fact, viz., whether the estimate made by th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the position upon facts in that case was that the complaint made against the Appellate Tribunal that it had not given the assessee an opportunity of the type described in Dhakeswari Cotton Mills' case was not warranted upon facts. Regarding the framing of the question, the difference between the question framed in Baliah's case and the question framed in this case is of little consequence for the reasons already discussed above, indicating the exact effect and meaning of the question as framed in the peculiar circumstances of this case. On the question of fact whether the assessee had or had not been given an opportunity to look into the alleged comparable cases, it is unnecessary to go beyond what is found stated expressly in paragraphs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
