9911796707
TMI Blog1984 (7) TMI 128X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y brought by him from Bangladesh (erstwhile East Pakistan) and started business from 21 June, 1966 out of money brought by him. He furnished returns of income for the asst. yrs. 1967-68, 1968-69 and 1969-70 showing income from business at Rs. 5,251, Rs. 14,981 and Rs. 15,291 respectively for those assessment years. Book of accounts were not produced by the assessee before the ITO since according to him, they were damaged due to flood. The ITO, therefore, in absence of the books of accounts, estimated the income from business at Rs. 8,000, Rs. 16,000 and Rs. 17,500 respectively for those assessment years. Further the ITO found that the assessee invested about Rs. 33,719 towards the cost of construction of the godown on the plot of land purch ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessee under a revised return filed for the years. Further according to him, the godown was constructed on the land by his father long before and he did not make any investment therein. The question of explaining source of investment, therefore, did not arise and he never offered Rs. 21,000 to taxation during the period of six years in equal proportion. According to ld. counsel, the assessee was not present at the time of the assessment and any admission made by Sri Ramesh Chandra Shah, Accountant on his behalf was not binding upon him since he had not authorised and instructed the said Accountant in this respect. Thus, it is argued by ld. counsel that the assessment is not based on appreciation of true facts and the AAC did not properly c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... type or it must be under misapprehension of facts. When the municipal record before the ITO itself, made it clear that the godown was constructed before 1964-65, the question for investment on the godown could not arise before the ITO and at any rate there could not be admission about investment on construction of godown unless there was misapprehension. Unfortunately, the AAC also did not look into these circumstances though an affidavit was filed by the assessee before him and he on statement of wrong facts that revised returns were filed for all the years and therein the assessee voluntarily disclosed investment towards the construction of godown, did not pay heed to appeal. 7. Now we come to the second issue. Since the assessee did n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
