9911796707
TMI Blog1957 (8) TMI 29X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... om, on the 6th of March, 1954, a notice was issued under section 34 of the Income Tax Act that in respect of the assessment year 1945-46 certain income had escaped assessment. This consisted of two sums of ₹ 50,000 and ₹ 3,500 which were found to be deposited in the joint names of the petitioners and another in the International Bank of India at Navsari and Zaveri Bazar branches respectively. Both the deposits were in December, 1943. On the 9th February, 1955, an assessment order was made holding that these two deposits constituted income from undisclosed sources and adding them to the income of the assessee as previously found. There was an appeal to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, who on the 10th of February, 1956, allow ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... proviso which we have set out above is very clear and unambiguous and it saves from the limitation prescribed any action taken in consequences of or to give effect to any or direction contained in an order under section 31, which means an order by an Appellate Assistant Commissioner in appeal. Therefore, all that one has got to do is to look to the order of the Appellate Assistant commissioner and to see whether there is any finding or direction in consequences of which, or to give effect to which, the present notice under section 34 was issued. Now, when one turns to the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, it is clear that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner found that these two amounts totalling to ₹ 553,500 did not fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Assistant Commissioner followed that decision and in that decision it had been held that the income was not for the year 1947-48, but for the previous year. Therefore, Mr. Joshi says, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner must be deemed to have held, not only that this was not the income for the year 1945-46, but so that it was the income for 1944-45. This argument, in our opinion, is not well-founded. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner was called upon to determine in this case only if it was the income for 1945-46 and not whether it was the income for 1944-45; and, in any event, as we have pointed out already he did not in fact determine that it was the income for 1944-45. He only stated that, if at all, it would be the income for 1944-4 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
