9911796707
TMI Blog1979 (7) TMI 35X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e reference case No. 91 of 1974, arises out of the assessment proceedings, while the other reference case No. 92 of 1974, arises out of the penalty proceedings relating to the same assessee and the same assessment year 1966-67. As the assessee and the assessment year are the same, it would be proper to dispose of these two reference applications by a common order. The circumstances, which have given rise to these two reference cases, may be briefly stated : The petitioner, Roop Narain, is the ex karta of a HUF. The relevant accounting year is that which ended on Diwali Svt. 2021, i.e., on October 24, 1965, pertaining to the assessment year 1966-67. The HUF, of which the petitioner was the karta. filed a return of income in the sum of Rs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pertaining to the assessment year 1966-67. The basis on which the figure of Rs. 13,000 appears to have been arrived at by the Tribunal is that the amount of income from undisclosed sources spent over the construction of the house of the assessee during the assessment year 1966-67, should bear the same proportion to the total amount of Rs. 20,102, which was estimated by the Tribunal to have been spent by the assessee on the construction of the house, over and above the amount accounted for by the assessee. On the basis of the aforesaid findings, the Tribunal partly allowed the appeal filed by the assessee. The assessee, thereafter, submitted an application seeking that four questions said to be arising out of the order of the Tribunal be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aring for the assessee, that in view of the provisions of s. 69 of the I.T. Act, 1961, the year in respect of the income from undisclosed sources should have been considered to be the financial year preceding the assessment year and in that view of the matter, the income of the assessee from undisclosed sources between April 4, 1965, to March 31, 1966, alone could have been added by the Tribunal in the income of the assessee relevant to the assessment year 1966-67. But, what the Tribunal appears to have done is that it has estimated the income of the assessee from undisclosed sources between Diwali 1964 and Diwali, 1965 at Rs. 13,000 and has added the same to the total income of the assessee. The learned counsel relied upon the decision of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ribunal to refer the following four questions to this court : " l. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in sustaining the order of the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax and holding that the assessee has concealed particulars of income within the meaning of section 271(1)(c) read with Explanation to the section ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the penalty could be rightly imposed, as the estimate of the income of the assessee was not accepted and was substituted by the estimate made by the authorities ? 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee was guilty of concealment ? 4. Whether the order dated June 11, 19 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
