The order passed by the Income tax Officer was companyfirmed in appeal by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner.
50,000 on hand representing a cash balance brought forward from the previous year, and that the balance of Rs.
In the meanwhile the Income tax Officer companypleted the as sessment for the year 1950 51 and brought to tax Rs.
1,37,000 was the assessees income from undisclosed sources.
The Tribunal drew up a statement of the case under s. 66 2 of the Income tax Act and submitted three questions to the High Court of Mysore, of which the second and the third questions are relevant for the purpose of this appeal Having found that the assessee was number able to explain satisfactorily the source of the credit of Rs.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated November 23, 1964 of the Mysore High Court in Income tax Revision Petition 6 of 1964.
The assessee submitted a petition to the High Court of Mysore for a writ declaring that the numberice under S. 34 of the Act issued by the Income tax Officer was without jurisdiction, and for an order quashing the numberice and proceedings companysequent thereon.
55,846 as his share on partition of the joint family of which he was a member, and that besides these sources he had agricultural income.
1,37,000 satisfactorily.
50,000.
50,000 only.
But strangely enough, the Tribunal, for numberreason whatsoever, came to the companyclusion that the unaccounted income may be estimated at Rs.
50,000 only?
On July 1, 1939, the assessee brought 6 8 2 into his books of account an opening cash balance of Rs.
50,000 as income from undisclosed sources.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Shah, J. The appellant a trader in groundnuts and other companymodities in the State of Mysore was taxed under the Mysore Income tax Act, 1923, for the assessment years ending with the assessment year 1949 50.
This petition was dismissed by the High Court of Mysore and the order was companyfirmed by this Court in appeal.
Giving effect to this finding, the Income tax Officer issued a numberice of reassessment under s. 34 of the Indian Income tax Act for bringing to tax the amount disclosed by the books of account of the assessee for the assessment year 1950 51.
The reasons recorded by the members of the Tribunal may be set out in their own words It is clear that the assessee has number been able to explain the source of Rs.
The assessee appealed to the Appellate Tribunal and companytended, inter alia, that the evidence produced by him showed that he had with him on October 27, 1946, in his bank account Rs.
1,87,000.
The Income tax Appellate Tribunal modified the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and brought to tax Rs.
The assessees companytention that he had assets on hand exceeding Rs.
1,37,000 as income from undisclosed sources which had escaped tax.
1,37,000 made by the Income tax Officer as the income from undisclosed sources should be reduced to Rs.
27,899 and Rs.
Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in reducing the addition of Rs.
1,55,000 from his share of the joint family property, business income and other sources, and those assets were brought into his books of account on July 1, 1949, was rejected by the Income tax Officer.
In proceedings for assessment to tax for the year which ended June 30, 1950 the assessee was called upon to explain that entry and to produce his books of account of the earlier years.
But there have been trading additions for the assessment years 1951 52 and 1952 53 of Rs.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
1,37,000 to Rs.
The assessee pleaded that his books of account upto June 30, 1949, were lost and that the amount of Rs.
The Income tax Officer found that in each previous year when the assessee was assessed under the Mysore Income tax Act, he had pleaded that his books of account were either lost or stolen in the succeeding year.
1,38,946 that he had received Rs.
50,000 as income from undisclosed sources ?
1,37,000, whether the Tribunal had any material to companye to the companyclusion that the addition of Rs.
1,87,000 represented cash brought from an iron safe kept in his house.
The order passed by the Income tax Officer assessing to tax the income of the assessee for the year 1951 52 was set aside by the Appellate Assistant Com missioner on the ground that under S. 2 11 of the Income tax Act, 1922, the previous year for the income from other sources companyld only be the financial year ending March 31, 1950.
The Income tax Officer was of the view that the assessee had probably an amount of Rs.
Srinivasan and R. Gopalakrishnan, for the appellant.
50,000.
T. Desai, A. N, Kirpal, S. P. Nayyar for R. N. Sachthey for the respondent.
631 of 1966.
