9911796707
TMI Blog1953 (3) TMI 54X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot reject the account books produced by the assessee, but he added a sum of ₹ 15,000/-which was the amount of high, denomination notes encashed by the assessee on 19-1-1946, through the Ranchi Branch of the Bengal Central Bank, Ltd. The amount encashed was not mentioned in the books of account produced by the assessee. The Income Tax Officer called upon the assessee to explain the source of the high, denomination notes. Not being satisfied with the explanation, the Income Tax Officer treated the amount of ₹ 15,000/-as secreted profit of the assessee. The assessee appealed to the Appellate Commissioner; but the appeal was dismissed on 24-1-1949. A further appeal was taken by the assessee to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. At t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the asses-see. It has been rightly pointed out by Mr. S. N. Dutt, who ably argued the case on behalf of the assessee, that the authorities have not disbelieved the books of account which the assessee produced. That circumstance, however, has no bearing on the question whether the amount of ₹ 4,000/-, which the assesses admittedly encashed on 19-1-1946, was secreted income. The principle to be applied in a case of this description is well settled. When the assessee fails to prove positively the source and nature of a certain amount which he received in the account-ing year, the revenue authorities are entitled to draw an inference that the receipts are of an income nature, unless the assessee proves the source and nature of the pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ome Tax Tribunal must be answered against the assessee and in favour of the Income Tax Department. 4. But the position is different with respect to the amount of ₹ 11,000/- which, was the amount of high denomination notes encashed in the name of the assessee's wife, Hemprabha Ganguli. As regards this amount, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has observed that an affidavit has been filed by the assesses wife, Hemprabha Ganguli, claiming that the notes encashed by her were her own property, and that her independent source of income was a house in Ranchi, and further that she had received from time to time cash gifts from her relations on various occasions. This explanation of Hemprabha Ganguli was not accepted by the Income Tax a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s amount. The principle to be applied is a different principle, namely, that, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the money standing in the name of the wife must be presumed to belong to her, and an assessee cannot be taxed in respect of the amount standing in the name of the wife. The onus of proof in such a case will be not on the assessee but on the Income Tax Department to show by at least some material that the amount standing in the name of the wife does not belong to the wife but belongs to the assessee. In this connection, the Appellate Tribunal has said that the close relationship of husband and wife would be a circumstance to indicate that the amount of ₹ 11,000/- really belonged to the assessee. In our opinion, this ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
