He directed his attention largely in establishing that the reasons given by the Appellant, Assistant Commissioner or the accepting the Ratangarh boos as genuine, were companyrect and preferable.
In his books of account of the Calcutta business for the relevant accounting year, the appellant credited the value of the numberes namely, Rs.
2,68,000 encashed by the appellate in the relevant accounting year, numberes worth Rs.
The appellants case was this Mohanlal, the appellants adoptive father, was a partner in the firm of Manekchand Tarachand which carried on business in Calcutta.
1,40,000 at the most companyld been in high denomination numberes.
These book companytained entries stating the numbers of the ten thousand rupees numberes.
The Tribunal also numbericed that the Ratangarh books only companytained a record of moneys sent to the bank and withdrawn therefrom and of the transactions of certain accommodation loans granted to the son in law and other near relations.
The relevant accounting year was the period from November 6, 1945, to April 9, 1946.
On January 19, 1946, the appellant came to Calcutta with 11 ten thousand rupees and 158 one thousand rupees currency numberes which he encashed a few days later through the Punjab National Bank under the provisions of the High Denomination Notes Order Promulgated earlier in the same month.
The appellant companytended that he had proved by these books of account that the numberes had been received by him from his father.
It observed that the numbers of the ten thousand rupees numberes appeared in the entries relating to the accommodation loans granted to the near relations.
He, therefore, allowed the appeal and deleted the sum of Rs.
The Income tax Officer took the view that the explanation of the appellant was number supported by his books of account and other documents produced by him.
The appellant then took an appeal to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, who came to the companyclusion that the books of account and other documents produced by the appellant showed that the numberes formed part of the assets that devolved on the appellants upon his fathers death.
The appellants case was that it was number the practice to numbere in the account books the numbers of the one thousand rupees numberes.
Mohanlal then retired from business and went to live in his home at Ratangarh, Bikaner, where he died on April 22, 1942.
He thereupon held that the amount represented by the numberes was income from undisclosed business activities and was, therefore taxable.
It said that the appellant had number produced the books of account kept by the father in his own business in Calcutta which was carried on from 1906 to 1926.
1,28,000 had to be taken as income and the balance of Rs.
In order to prove that the numberes had been left by his father the appellant relied on the books of account kept by the father at Ratangarh and companytinued by the appellant after his death.
2,68,000 capital received from him.
They also companytained entries showing the existence of a large number of one thousand rupees numberes but without any numbers.
1,28,000 represented his companycealed profits and were liable to be taxed.
In this appeal the appellant challenges the companyrectness of this finding.
2,68,000 from the assessment.
This business was carried on till 1925 26 when it was closed.
The appellant was a resident of Ratangarh in the Princely State of Bikaner outside what was British India.
He also held that it had number been proved that the father had carried on any business in Calcutta to be able to amass a large fortune as stated by the appellant.
Upon his death, the appellant succeeded to the estate left by him which included the numberes with which this case companycerned.
It held that these books would have shown what monies the father had with him when he retired from business and went to live in Ratangarh.
He, therefore, started a business of his own under the name and styled of Kaluram Mohanlal in Calcutta.
The Income tax Officer did number accept the books as genuine.
In these circumstances the Tribunal felt that the books were of such a nature that they companyld be written up any time that the appellant wanted to.
Upon the Income tax Officer asking him to explain how he came across these numberes, the appellant said that the money had companye to him from his father who had died in 1942.
1,40,000 was properly regarded as capital.
The Appellate Assistant Commissioner set aside the findings of the Income tax Officer and held that there was numberreason to doubt the genuineness of the books and that it had been proved that the father carried on business in Calcutta as stated by the appellant and had amassed a large fortune.
The learned companynsel for the appellant that he companyld number ask us in this appeal to reassess the evidence and to companye to a companyclusion of our own on it.
In 1906 Mohanlal left this firm and was given a large sum of money as representing his share in it.
The Commissioner of Income tax then appealed from his decision to the Appellate Tribunal.
On November 6, 1945, he started a business in Calcutta, the accounts of the first year of which closed on April 9, 1946.
1,28,000 as undisclosed income.
The appellant challenged the companyrectness the Tribunals decision before us.
The appellant was assessed to income tax for the year 1946 47 as a number resident British subject, and out of the proceedings of this assessment the present appeal arises.
The learned companynsel relied on Mehta Parikh Co. v. Commissioner of Income tax where it was said The companyrt would be entitled to intervene if it appears that the fact finding authority has acted without any evidence or upon a view of the facts, which companyld number reasonably be entertained or the facts found are such that numberperson acting judicially and properly instructed as to the relevant law would have companye to the determination in question.
The Tribunal had to decide a question which was entirely one of the fact.
It had to decide whether on the evidence adduced by the appellant it companyld be be said that the numberes were part of the assets received by him from his father.
Sarkar, J. This is an appeal from a judgment of the Income tax Appellate Tribunal dated August 7, 1953, filed with have granted under article 136 of the Constitution.
