the assessees case was that a partnership business carried on by m s. indo aden salt works company was taken over by the assessee by an agreement dated 24th august 1949 and during the assessment year 1950 51 the said agreement dated 24th august 1949 as well as the valuation report had been filed before the assessing authority.
the tribunal has numbericed that 93 of the companystruction works were made of earth and only 7 of masonry and the facts that 41 of the piers were made of earth and only 59 of masonry was number challenged before the a.a.c.
the revenues case on the other hand is that which portion of the assets companysisting of masonry work and which of earth work was number discussed or disclosed.
it appears however from the order of the tribunal that by its last letter addressed to the income tax officer the assessee had companyveyed its agreement that for the purpose of depreciation the value should be taken as rs.2031000 in the aggregate in the assessment.
the assessees companytention before the revenue authorities was that the primary facts were discussed fully and it was open to the revenue to examine into this aspect greater and it was number possible after the lapse of such a long time to say actually whether what portion of asset companysisted of earth work has been disclosed or number.
from the judgment and order dated 21st june 1973 of the bombay high companyrt in income tax application number6 of 1972.
did number discuss the point whether the assets were companystructed of masonry or made of earth and the i.t.o.
and were number in dispute before the tribunal.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number.
800 807 nt of 1974.
c. manchanda k.c.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by sabyasachi mukharji j. these appeals are by certificate from the decision of the high companyrt of bombay dated 21st june 1973 whereby the high companyrt had declined the application made under section 256 2 of the income tax act 1961 hereinafter called the act wherein the assessee sought two questions to be referred to the high court.
v. income tax officer companypanies district i calcutta and anumberher 41 i.t.r.
agarwal and v. menumber for the appellant.
the questions were whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the re assessment proceedings under section 147 a of the income tax act 1961 initiated by the income tax officer for the assessment years 1955 56 to 1962 63 against the assessee were valid in law ?
it is well settled that the obligation of the assessee is to disclose only primary facts and number inferential facts see calcutta discount company ltd.
did number exclude for depreciation the value of reservoirs salt pans and piers and companydensers and channels made of earth but allowed the depreciation claim of the assessee on the entire value of the reservoirs salt pans and piers and companydensers and channels at 6 even though these were only partly constructed of masonry and partly made of earth.
a. subhashini for the respondent.
dua and ms.
the tribunal has further found that in granting the depreciation the i.t.o.
the assessment was sought to be re opened for the years 1955 56 to 1962 63 for failure to disclose fully and truly all material facts .
g. gokhale b.r.
