9911796707
TMI Blog1993 (10) TMI 54X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fully and truly all material facts which were necessary for the purpose of completing the original assessment and consequently the Income-tax Officer had validly reopened the assessment under section 147(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961?" The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a registered firm and during the relevant assessment year in respect of the accounting period ending on December 31, 1964, the assessee filed a return showing income of Rs. 1,61,734. In the course of the original assessment proceedings, the assessee has submitted copies of accounts of various parties from whom the assessee claimed to have borrowed moneys. One such party was Nandkishore Laxminarain, Bombay, from whom a sum of Rs. 31,000 was alleged to ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ncome-tax Officer, Bombay, the statements of Neelamani and Prem Lata Ras Behari Lal, witnesses on behalf of Nandkishore Laxminarain, were recorded and cross-examination was allowed to the assessee-company in which it was stated that it was only a hawala entry and the money was not actually given to the assessee-firm. In the assessment order, the Income-tax Officer was of the view that commission was issued to the Income-tax Officer, Bombay, for cross-examination of Nandkishore Laxminarain which was done on March 20, 1976, in which it was stated that the loan was never advanced as a genuine loan and it was only a hawala entry. On the basis of the statement given by the parties and the opportunity of cross-examination being allowed, the amoun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f 1982-decided on October 12, 1993). We are of the view that the point referred by the Income-tax Tribunal is fully covered by these decisions and adopting the same reasoning, we are of the view that the provisions of section 147(a) were rightly involved in this case. In view of the above decision, it has to be considered that disclosure by Nandkishore Laxminarain through its partner that the said firm was doing hawala business and they never advanced the money to the assessee but were merely name-lenders establishes that there was no full and true disclosure of the facts which were required to be disclosed and that that fact being within the knowledge of the assessee, simply because the enquiry was not made by the Income-tax Officer and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
