9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (4) TMI 21X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ome was shown at Rs. 38,535. The same consisted of three components, namely, income from profession as an advocate amounting to Rs. 20,000, income of interest received from one Kanhaiyalal Sao to the tune of Rs. 18,535 and from agriculture a sum of Rs. 5,000. The Income-tax Department conducted a search at his residence as well as office on September 22, 1981. The premises of his father, Kanhaiylal Sao, and his brother, Dr. D.K. Jain, was also effected. During the search of his residence no ornaments were found but from the locker in the Punjab National Bank, Sagar, gold ornaments weighing 664.900 gms., and primary gold weighing 102.900 gms., were found and seized. The primary gold was taken over by the Central Excise Department and eventua ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Rs. 51,967 as unexplained investment under section 69A of the Act. Thus, the total income was determined at Rs. 90,502 plus agricultural income of Rs. 5,000. The assessment order is dated March 22, 1985. Being dissatisfied with the order of assessment the assessee-applicant preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), who vide order dated May 1, 1986, took into consideration the status of the two families and came to hold that Smt. Kiran Devi would have received 40 tolas of gold ornaments at the time of her marriage and the receipt of 50 tolas of gold ornaments in the family partition was satisfactorily explained with the evidence produced. The appellate authority expressed the view that in the partition the appl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the original authority and rejected the cross appeal of the assessee-applicant. After the order was passed by the Tribunal the applicant filed an application under section 256(1) of the Act for referring certain questions of law to this court for answering the same. The Tribunal vide order dated December 18, 1991, dismissed the application expressing the view that the findings were based on the factual appreciation of facts and no question of law arose warranting reference to the High Court. Assailing the aforesaid it is submitted by Mr. H.S. Shrivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, that on a proper appraisal of the evidence on record the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) had accepted the gold ornaments weighing 664.900 gms., and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the best efforts of the assessee. It is urged by him that four questions were urged before the Tribunal. Three questions have been put forth in this application and that clearly goes to show that as the assessee is absolutely unsure about the nature of the legal issue that arises in the case at hand and, therefore, the application deserves to be rejected. At this juncture, we may proceed to advert to the nature of the application which was filed before the Tribunal for referring the questions of law to this court. On a perusal of the order passed by the Tribunal dealing with the application under section 256(1) of the Act, it is manifest that the following questions were proposed for reference: "1. Whether there was valid material to hold ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ents and primary gold under section 69A of the Income-tax Act in the hands of the assessee?" The crux of the matter is whether there has been perversity of approach by the Tribunal. Mr. Shrivastava, learned counsel for the applicant-assessee, would like us to scan and scrutinise the order of the Tribunal to find out that the Tribunal has approached the matter from erroneous angles and such an approach is not only unsustainable or tenable in law but is also contrary to the obtaining factual matrix. Mr. Arya, learned counsel for the Revenue, on the contrary, has submitted that there is no error as the reasoning ascribed by the Tribunal is totally based on proper appreciation of facts. We may at this juncture clarify that certain citations w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the same is not supported by reasons. Under these circumstances, the finding of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) cannot be sustained and accordingly the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) is reversed and that of the Assessing Officer restored."
On a perusal of the aforesaid reasoning we are of the considered opinion that the Tribunal has ascribed cogent reasons and the entire appreciation is based on the facts. We perceive no perversity of approach. Hence, we have no hesitation in holding that the facts and circumstances of the case do not warrant calling for the statement of facts from the Tribunal.
Resultantly, the application preferred under section 256(2) of the Act stands dismissed. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
