1979 (7) TMI 61

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ner in two firms, M/s. Amolak Ram Ram Prakash and M/s. Ram Prakash Kulbhushan Rai. For the year 1967-68, he filed a return showing an income of Rs. 4,000. During the course of assessment the ITO found that the assessee had invested a sum of Rs. 15,000 for the purchase of a truck which was run in partnership. The assessee's explanation regarding the investment was that a loan of Rs. 2,000 had been .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tion. It also held that it was not conclusively established that the assessee had committed a fraud in filing the return or was wilfully or grossly negligent. It appears to us that the Tribunal has approached the question in a wrong perspective. In the relevant assessment year, in view of the first Explanation to s. 271(1)(c), in a case where the returned income was less than eighty per cent. of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ee had failed to file an accurate return of his income not due to any fraud or wilful or gross neglect on his part. It is only in case this is established, that the fiction raised by the Explanation stands rebutted. In the present case, the Tribunal has not considered the explanation of the assessee and has not given a clear finding as to whether the explanation offered was acceptable. It has allo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X