9911796707
TMI Blog1983 (10) TMI 35X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the 'deemed dividends' assessable under section 2(22)(e) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and therefore, there was no case for the Income-tax Officer to initiate proceedings under section 147(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the Income-tax officer had assumed jurisdiction under section 147(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, without having adequate supporting materials to entertain the belief that income had escaped assessment ? " However, we find that, on the facts and in the circumstances of this case, the decision taken by the Tribunal in this case appears to be consistent with the legal position. The assessee was asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntention of the assessee regarding the validity of the proceedings under s. 147(a) and held that the assessee was under no obligation to disclose in his return the income which became part of the total income only by virtue of a fiction of law. He relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in Muthiah Chettiar v. CIT [1969] 74 ITR 183, and held that the ratio of the said decision of the Supreme Court was applicable to the facts of the present case. He also held that the statutory return of income did not require that deemed income under s. 2(22)(e) should be disclosed in the return of income and therefore, there was no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose the material facts. He, accordingly, held that s. 147(a) was not applicable ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... should be drawn from those facts. The learned counsel for the Revenue would say that the fact whether the company lent money to the assessee in the normal course of its business or not was not brought to the notice of the ITO and that it is the duty of the assessee to show that his loan transaction was in the normal course of the business of the company. Here again it is for the ITO to have investigated the question as to whether the company advanced loan to the assessee in the normal course of its business of money-lending, when the factum of the company lending money to the assessee was brought to his notice. It appears from the order of the ITO that he did not examine at the original stage whether or not the loan was in the ordinary cou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
