9911796707
TMI Blog1969 (7) TMI 20X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tailed scrutiny of the accounts produced and the copies of the assessee's accounts obtained from the books of his customers residing in the Hyderabad State when cross-checked revealed that the assessee had understated sales, inflated expenses and thereby concealed a large part of his income in the return." For the various reasons given in his order, he held that the day-book did not reflect the correct position and was hence unreliable. He added a sum of Rs. 3,226 under the head " Manufacturing cost claimed in excess ", Rs. 7,714 under the head " Recoveries under cartage not accounted for ", Rs. 3,273 under the head " Recoveries under coolies " not accounted for, and sums of Rs. 1,094, Rs. 1,274 and Rs. 254 under the heads " School fund ", " Carting cooly " and " Mats ", respectively. Dealing with the concealed profits, he added a sum of Rs. 37,200 under the head " Understatement of sales ", Rs. 1,747 under the head " Bank account " and Rs. 4,875 under the head " Shortage on rebagging ". These and other additions together disclosed an income amounting to Rs. 78,687 which he determined as income from business. The assessee preferred an appeal to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... guish his case from cases relied on by the Tribunal. We do not think that Mr. Ramarao is justified in contending that the Tribunal has arrived at the figure of Rs. 20,000 without any consideration of the evidence and has fixed it arbitrarily. The Tribunal has expressly stated that the officer has given sound reasons for the additions made by him. The rerefence can only be to the Income-tax Officer in so far as the additions made by him and were affirmed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. The reference the Tribunal felt it unnecessary to restate those reasons once again in the order. Though, in our opinion, it would have been more desirable on the part of the Tribunal to give in its own words, briefly it may be, the reasons for their decision, it cannot be said that the Tribunal acted arbitrarily and fixed the figure of Rs. 20,000. We have gone through the order of the Income-tax Officer and the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. The Income-tax Officer has given detailed reasons for making the additions under each head and in respect of those additions which were upheld by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner also gave his reasons. The Tr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arlier part of the judgment of the Tribunal, where it has affirmed the reasoning for the additions given by the officer. It is true that the proper course for the Tribunal should have been to confirm the figure arrived at by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, if it agreed with the finding of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner but that is not a matter about which the assessee can complain. The mere fact that the Tribunal chose to reduce the addition to a sum of Rs. 20,000 cannot in any way detract from the position that the Tribunal had agreed with file reasoning of the Income-tax Officer, which was affirmed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. Mr. Ramarao urged that this is a fit case for remand to the Tribunal, after answering the question in favour of the for consideration of the appeal in the light of the answer given by this court. He drew our attention to the following observation in Esthuri Aswathiah v. Commissioner of Income-tax: " Section 66(5) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, requires the Tribunal on receiving a copy of the judgment of the High Court to pass such orders as are necessary to dispose of the case conformably to such judgment. This clearly impos ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ction 66(2) of the Act, as we are of the view that the Tribunal has passed the order after agreeing with the detailed reasons given by the Tribunal and the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the order cannot be said to be vitiated by any of the circumstances referred to it in the judgment of the Supreme Court. Mr. Ramarao then contended that it is not permissible for this court to look into the reasons given by the Income-tax Officer or the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and should merely concern itself with the reasons given by the Tribunal and decide whether those reasons satisfy the requirement of law, and whether they are sufficient to enable the Tribunal to arrive at the conclusion at which it arrived. He submitted that this court cannot go outside the facts contained in the statement of case. No exception can be taken to the contention that the High Court in exercising its jurisdiction under section 66(2) of the Act cannot travel outside the statement of case prepared by the Tribunal. In this case, the statement of case merely consists of reference to the orders of the Income-tax Officer, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the tribunal. The effect of those order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gh Court requiring that these orders and the records before the Income-tax Officer have to be printed in a paper book in a reference under section 66 of the Income-tax Act and to the fact that the documents and proceedings annexed to the statement of case are annexed for consideration of the High Court and therefore the High Court is entitled to look into them even if there be no specific reference to them in the body of the statement. We have, therefore, no hesitation in rejecting the contention of Mr. Ramarao that we are not entitled to look into the orders of the Income-tax Officer and the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, in order to see whether the Tribunal, which has observed that the reasons given by them are sound, was justified in its conclusion. Mr. Ramarao has not been able to assail any of the reasons given by the Income-tax Officer or the Appellate Assistant Commissioner on any substantial ground. He, however, argued that the addition of Rs. 37,000 under the head " Under-statement of sales " is arrived at on the basis that the profit per wagon was Rs. 200 as revealed by certain enquiries. He contended that these enquiries were not placed before the assessee and he ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
