9911796707
TMI Blog1992 (1) TMI 41X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . The late Smt. Nafeesa Beevi was an assessee to income-tax. She was assessed as an individual. The respondents are the legal heirs of Nafeesa Beevi who had filed her return for the year 1973-74 declaring a total income of Rs. 37,335, specifying it as winnings from lottery. It is common ground that Smt. Nafeesa Beevi won the first prize of the 47th Kerala State Lottery. She received an amount of Rs. 1,86,675 after deducting a sum of Rs. 98,325 towards income-tax from the prize amount of Rs. 2,85,000. The assessee put forward the plea that, out of the sum of Rs. 1,86,675 her share of income is only 37,335. It was submitted that she purchased the ticket jointly with her four brothers with the understanding that, in case the ticket wins the pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the reverse side of the ticket in his presence. The assessee also requested the Income-tax Officer to summon the ticket as evidence of joint ownership and also the seller of the ticket for examination. These requests were not acceded to the Appellate Tribunal held that the affidavits filed by the four brothers of Smt. Nafeesa Beevi and also by the seller of the ticket cannot be brushed aside. If it was the case of the Revenue that the affidavits are not reliable, it was open to the Income-tax Officer to summon the deponents for cross-examination or require the assessee to produce better evidence. It was not done. The Appellate Tribunal also referred to the affidavit filed by the seller of the ticket who categorically stated that the signatu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... These affidavits were not contradicted. The Revenue did not indicate, at any point of time, that these affidavits will not be accepted and that the deponents should be produced for cross-examination. In the light of the uncontradicted affidavits filed by the four brothers of Smt. Nafeesa Beevi and the affidavit filed by the seller of the ticket on which reliance was placed by the Appellate Tribunal to hold that the deceased Nafeesa Beevi was only the part owner of the ticket and not the full owner and she is liable to be assessed only on one-fifth of the prize amount is the only possible conclusion that could be reached on facts. We are of the view that no question of law arises out of the appellate order of the Tribunal dated June 22, 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
