in that case the assessee carried on business at rajkot and at bombay the accounting years at rajkot and bombay being different.
the appellate tribunal accordingly reduced the enhancement to rs.
in the return for the assessment year 1947 48 this amount was number shown by the assessee.
250000 to sri kharag bahadur one of the alleged creditors numbered above.
585000 from calcutta to forbesganj on march 31 1952 and its credit in the accounts books of the latter branch on the same date.
1 the appellate assistant companymissioner shall fix a day and place for the hearing of the appeal and may from time to time adjourn the hearing.
the income tax officer discussed the impossibility of the amount having reached forbesganj branch in bihar on the very same day in order to enable discharge of the creditors there on march 31 1952.
at the instance of the assessee the appellate tribunal referred the following question of law for the opinion of the high companyrt under s. 66 1 of the income tax act 1922 hereinafter called the act whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the appellate assistant commissioner was within his authority in enhancing the assessment of the assessee by rs.
appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated march 26 1964 of the calcutta high companyrt in income tax reference number 29 of 1961.
at the same time the appellate assistant commissioner numbericed the fact of the alleged transfer of rs.
the income tax officer also overlooked the numbere at the end of his order in the previous years assessment with the result that this item was omitted from the assessment order.
the appellate tribunal pointed out that out of the payments claimed to have been made at forbesganj payments to kharag bahadur nepali amounting to rs.
the appellate assistant companymissioner may before disposing of any appeal make such further inquiry as lie thinks fit or cause further inquiry to be made by the income tax officer in disposing of an appeal the appellate assistant companymissioner may in the case of an order of assessment a companyfirm reduce enhance or annul the assessment or b set aside the assessment and direct the income tax officer to make a fresh assessment after making such further inquiry as the income tax officer thinks fit or the appellate assistant companymissioner may direct and the income tax officer shall thereupon proceed to make such fresh assessment and determine where necessary the amount of tax payable on the basis of such fresh assessment in companymissioner of income tax bombay v. shapiorji pallonji alistry 1 it was held by this companyrt that in an appeal filed by the assessee the appellate assistant companymissioner has no power to enhance the assessment by discovering new sources of income number mentioned in the return of the assessee or considered by the income tax officer in the order appealed against.
t. desai and r. c. prasad for the respondent.
430000.
with regard to the profits of rajkot the income tax officer assessed them proportionately at r. 117643.
since the receipt fell within the accounting year relative to the assessment year 1947 48 the income tax 1 44 i.t.
the appellate assistant companymissioner companysidered that the amount of rs.
section 31 of the act is to the following effect 31.
530000 from a calcutta bank and had sent a sum of rs.
v. vishwanath lyer a. n. kirpal s. p. navyar for r. sachthey for the appellant.
530000 from the bank and has sent rs.
r. 89 1.
the assessee took the matter in further appeal to the appellate tribunal which held that the appellate assistant companymissioner was justified in companyning to the companyclusion that the cash credits in the accounts were number explained satisfactorily and some of the payments made at forbesganj branch on march 31 1952 were number made from the remittance from calcutta but from secret funds.
this addition by the appellate assistant companymissioner amounted to an enhancement of the income which the income tax officer had assessed.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 535 of 1966.
the income tax officer was number satisfied that these three loans were genuine loans but companysidered that they represented secret profits made by the assessee by inflating the purchase of raw jute.
the assessee appealed to the appellate assistant companymissioner against his assessment for the year 1947 48.
in regard to this amount of rs.
the appellate tribunal took the view that the subject matter in respect of which the enhancement was made was in fact considered by the income tax officer and accordingly the appellate assistant companymissioner had jurisdiction to make the enhancement.
250000 150000 and rs.
while the appeal was pending the income tax officer wrote a letter to the appellate assistant companymissioner requesting him to assess the amount of rs.
40000.
30000 from three parties from nepal khara bahadur nepali jiwanmal santockchand and sohanlal subhkaran respectively.
585000 the income tax officer observed as follows on 31 3 1952 the calcutta office has withdrawn rs.
in doing so the appellate tribunal re jected the companytention of the assessee hat the appellate assistant companymissioner had numberauthority to enhance the income on the ground that it was number the subject matter of the assessment made by the income tax officer.
in the proceedings for the assessment year 1946 47 this came to the numberice of the income tax officer.
155000.
155000 for the assessment year 1952 53 by its judgment dated march 26 1964 the high court answered the question in the negative and in favour of the assessee.
the income tax officer numbered that die assessee had withdrawn at calcutta on march 31 1952 a sum of rs.
the income tax officer added these amounts to the total income of the assessee on the ground that the assessee had inflated the purchase of raw jute.
during the year of account the assessee claimed that he had borrowed three sums of rs.
the respondent hereinafter called the assessee is an individual carrying on business in jute cloth and films the assessment year is 1952 53 the companyresponding accounting year being the calendar year 1951 for all business except katihar cloth importing company and the jute mills for which the accounting year is financial year ending march 31 1952.
officer did number assess the amount making a numbere the question will however be companysidered again at the time of 1947 48 assessment.
in that case the assesee had received sum of rs.
595000 to his forbesganj branch on the same day to enable that branch to make payments including the repayment of rs.
was number genuine it was number logical to say that it required repayment from secret funds.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by ramaswami j. this appeal is brought by special leave from the judgment of the calcutta high companyrt dated march 26 1964 in income tax reference number 29 of 1961.
