1977 (9) TMI 44

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... minor son Sham H. Punjabi. The amount was disclosed in the balance sheet as at 31st March, 1966 but the name of the son nor any other name was not disclosed against it. In the balance sheets as at 31st March, 1967 and 31st March, 1963 the name entered against the amount of Rs. 55,000 was Universal Automobiles, Delhi. 4. The assessee filed returns for asst. yrs. 1966-67, 1967-68 1968-69 on or about 28th Sept., 1966, 27th Sept., 1967 and 24th July, 1968, respectively. He did not declare therein any income from Universal Automobiles. It appears that he filed copies of the balance sheets including therein particulars as stated in the preceding para. 5. The ITO made assessments for the three respective years on 30th Sept., 1969, 30th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... hallenging the validity of the re-opening of the assessments as also the merits of the case for the disputed additions made under s. 64. 10. Mr. Jain, learned Representative of the assessee, raised or pressed before us a number of points attacking the validity of the action intitated under s. 147(a) and the assessments made accordingly as also the merits of the addition. It is not necessary to deal however with all these points because, as we shall presently discuss we find that the reassessments has to be cancelled on the preliminary finding that the re-opening of the assessments was not relevant. 11. The relevant contention is that there is nothing to show that the assessee has not fully and truly disclosed all material facts necess .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... was the case of the ITO (and also of the AAC at a later stage) but on the contrary the notes of the ITO concerned with the assessment of the assessee, the later of the ITO at Delhi which was the provication or the intention of the re-assessment proceedings and re-assessment orders in the case of the ITO, all clearly show that the assessments were re-opened on the ground that the provisions of s. 64 were applicable and no other count. This contention raised by Shri Tamhane is not acceptable to us. 14. For the reasons stated above we find that it cannot be said that the assessee had not disclosed fully and truly all material facts necessary for his assessments for the three years in question and that it was by virtue of the omission or th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X