9911796707
TMI Blog1971 (10) TMI 25X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n. These petitions are consequently accepted with costs and the impugned notices are quashed - - - - - Dated:- 22-10-1971 - Judge(s) : BAL RAJ TULI. JUDGMENT BAL RAJ TULI J.-This judgment will dispose of C.Ws. Nos. 1398 and 1399 of 1971, as the facts are identical and the relief claimed is also the same. Two writ petitions have been filed because two different assessment years are involved. C.W. No. 1398 of 1971 relates to the assessment year 1964-65, while C.W. No. 1399 of 1971 relates to the assessment year 1963-64. It is only necessary to refer to the facts in C.W. No. 1399 of 1971 to decide the matter in dispute. The petitioner-firm filed its return for the assessment year 1963-64 on September 30, 1963, as required under secti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ies of all the parties in whose the credits stood in its books along with dates of payment, letters of confirmation and copies of accounts. The Income-tax Officer felt satisfied with respect to the cash credits of the five firms mentioned above and directed the petitioner-firm to prove the genuineness of payments made on behalf of the following firms: (i) M/s. Pishori Lal Tirath Ram, (ii) M/s. Narain Dass Ishar Dass, (iii) M/s. Tara Singh Dyal Singh On the next date of hearing, that is, July 21, 1964, the petitioner-firm produced the discharged pronotes, confirmatory letters and certificates of these three firms which were placed on the file. The case was further discussed on July 25, 1964, and July 27, 1964, when the accountant ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ithin time. It may be pointed out here that the period of limitation for issue of notice under section 147(a) is eight years if the amount of tax escaped is less than Rs. 50,000 and sixteen years if the amount of tax escaped is more than Rs. 50,000 and the period of limitation under section 147(b) is four years from the date of the expiry of the assessment year. If section 147(a) applied, the notices issued in both cases were within time, but if section. 147(b) applied, the notices were barred by time as they had admittedly been issued more than four years after the expiry of the relevant assessment year. The learned counsel for the petitioner-firm has submitted that the petitioner-firm had disclosed fully and truly all material facts nec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the duty of disclosing all the primary facts relevant to the decision of the question before the assessing authority lies on the assessee..... Does the duty, however, extend beyond the full and truthful disclosure of all primary facts? In our opinion, the answer to this question must be in the negative. Once all the primary facts are before the assessing authority, he requires no further assistance by way of disclosure. It is for him to decide what inferences of facts can be reasonably drawn and what legal inferences have ultimately to be drawn. It is not for somebody else--far less the assessee--to tell the assessing authority what inferences, whether of facts or law, should be drawn...... We have, therefore, come to the conclusion that w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d of this action of the Income-tax Officer was the discovery of the facts, as a result of the search and seizure conducted by the local sales tax authorities, which revealed that a large number of parties including (1) M/s. Tola Singh Sohan Singh, (2) M/s. Amir Chand Moti Ram, (3) M/s. Mool Chand Chander Bhan, (4) M/s. Gurdit Singh Kataria, (5) M/s. Didar Singh Charan Singh and (6) M/s. Pishori Lal Tirath Ram, were carrying on the business of bogus hundis in order to facilitate concealment of the real, income of traders like the petitioner-firm. On receipt of this information, the Income-tax Officer made enquiries with regard to the various cash credits appearing in the balance-sheet of the assessee for the year under consideration. He was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in Bhanji Lavji v. Commissioner of Income-tax , wherein the facts have been given in detail. The assessee was a ghee merchant residing in Porbandar which was an Indian State. He used to sell ghee in British India and the sale proceeds were credited in his account with the Bank of India Ltd., Bombay. He had an account also with M/s. Shamji Kalidas Company and used to receive interest from that firm. In the assessment years 1947-48 and 1948-49, he only disclosed his income on account of interest received from M/s. Shamji Kalidas Company and stated that he did not do any other business in British India. On that basis, the sale proceeds received by the assessee and deposited in his bank account with the Bank of India Ltd. or the deposits wi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
