9911796707
TMI Blog1973 (9) TMI 40X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ear 1963-64 : "(1) Whether the Tribunal had any material to reach the finding that the asssessee had satisfactorily explained the moneys entered in the exercise book ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the sum of Rs. 30,000 could not be deemed to be the income of the assessee ?" The orignal assessee, Chetan Dass (now deceased), was an individual, who derived income from purchase and sale of hing, supari, navan and from house property. The assessment year involved is 1963-64, for which the previous year ended on March 31, 1963. The Income-tax Officer had made an addition of Rs. 1,00,000, by way of income from undisclosed sources. Rs. 70,000 were added by ref ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the ground that the advances were more than covered by the withdrawals in the accounts of the aforesaid three depositors. Without deciding the question about the ownership of the exercise book, the, Tribunal confirmed the deletion of the addition of Rs. 30,000. The Tribunal also rejected an application of the revenue under section 256(1) of the Act and declined to make a reference to this court on the ground that its findings were findings of fact based on evidence on record. Mr. B. N. Kirpal the learned counsel for the revenue, contended that the assesse had failed to link the withdrawals in the three accounts with the loans amounting to Rs. 30,000 advanced by him. In the absence of such a link, the amount was liable to be added as inc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... struction Co., "what inference should be drawn from the facts proved is a question of fact and the Tribunal's finding on that question is final." (Also see Commissioner of Income-tax v. Nelliappan). We are also satisfied that the inference drawn by the Tribunal from the facts proved on record was neither unreasonable, nor perverse, nor could it be said to be based on mere conjectures or surmises, nor could it be said to be based on no evidence. The Tribunal was, therefore, right in rejecting the revenue's prayers for referring the aforesaid questions to this court on the ground that no question of law had arisen from its order. The petition under the circumstances is dismissed, but there shall be no order as to costs. Petition dismiss ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
