9911796707
TMI Blog1985 (2) TMI 18X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessment ? " The Tribunal has refused to make a reference on the ground that no question of law arose. The real point in issue now is whether this controversy regarding the application of section 147(a) of the Act was decided as a question of fact. The circumstances of the case have been narrated in full by the Tribunal. The assessee had certain deposits received from hundi bankers whose addresses and names were disclosed at the time of the original assessment and also confirmatory letters were furnished. The assessment was made accepting the deposits as genuine. The controversy now is : Are there grounds for reopening the assessment in accordance with law ? This type of a case has often been referred to the court as a question of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der. The only evidence made available to us is his confessional statement which we have already analysed above. Even such statement is missing in the case of Afghan Fruit Co. and there is not even an iota of evidence implicating the remaining two parties. " It may be mentioned that earlier in the order, the following observations were made regarding Gopal Dass Manohar Lal: " Manohar Lal Gopal Dass clearly admitted that he had income of Rs. 3,600 from brokerage which he had earned by arranging finances to different parties. In other words, the fact that he had acted as a broker for obtaining finances for the parties could not be doubted. He, of course, further admitted that he had not advanced his own money to any party either at Delhi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Department to contend that mere suspicion can permit the Income-tax Officer to set aside the previous assessment at his will and to substitute any other assessment he feels like on mere suspicion. It was contended by counsel for the assessee that here there was no change in the primary facts and virtually the same material was being treated differently by the Income-tax Officer and hence no question of law arose being either not a question of law or being so settled not to deserve being referred once again to this court. Learned counsel for the Department has cited a number of cases, but the strongest case was ITO v. Mahadeo Lai Tulsyan [1978] 111 ITR 25 (Cal). There also hundi loans were involved, which were accepted in the origin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
