NIRMAL DAS JASSUMAL v. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 1987-LL-0702-2

Citation	1987-LL-0702-2
Appellant Name	NIRMAL DAS JASSUMAL
Respondent Name	COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
Court	ITAT
Relevant Act	Income-tax
Date of Order	02/07/1987
Assessment Year	1978-79
Judgment	View Judgment
Keyword Tags	undisclosed income • cash credit
Bot Summary:	JUDGMENT JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by G. G. SOHANI J.-This is an application under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The material facts giving rise to this application, briefly, are as follows: The applicant is a registered partnership firm carrying on business at Indore, While framing the assessment of the assessee for the assessment year 1978-79, the Income-tax Officer held that the sum of Rs. 35,000 credited in the account of Smt. Shilabai, wife of Parasram, one of the partners, was not satisfactorily explained and the amount was includible in the income of the assessee. On further appeal by the Revenue before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Indore Bench, the Tribunal set aside the order passed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and held that the Income-tax Officer had rightly taxed the sum in question as the assessee's income under section 68 of the Act. The application for making a reference submitted by the assessee was rejected. Learned counsel for the applicant contended that the finding of the Tribunal that the cash credit in question represented the undisclosed income of the assessee was based on surmises and conjectures and was arrived at by failing to take into consideration the relevant material and the circular of the Board. In reply, learned counsel for the Revenue contended that no question of law arose out of the order passed by the Tribunal. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we have come to the conclusion that the following question of law does arise in this case: Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, there was material before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal for holding that the sum of Rs. 35,000 credited in the account of Smt. Shilabai represented the income of the assessee for the assessment year 1978-79 from undisclosed sources The application is accordingly allowed.

JUDGMENT JUDGMENT judgment of court was delivered by G. G. SOHANI J.-This is application under section 256(2) of Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as " Act "). material facts giving rise to this application, briefly, are as follows: applicant is registered partnership firm carrying on business at Indore, While framing assessment of assessee for assessment year 1978-79, Income-tax Officer held that sum of Rs. 35,000 credited in account of Smt. Shilabai, wife of Parasram, one of partners, was not satisfactorily explained and amount was, therefore, includible in income of assessee. Aggrieved by that order, assessee preferred appeal before Appellate Assistant Commissioner, who allowed appeal. On further appeal by Revenue before Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Indore Bench, Tribunal set aside order passed by Appellate Assistant Commissioner and held that Income-tax Officer had rightly taxed sum in question as assessee's income under section 68 of Act. application for making reference submitted by assessee was rejected. Hence, assessee has filed this application. Learned counsel for applicant contended that finding of Tribunal that cash credit in question represented undisclosed income of assessee was based on surmises and conjectures and was arrived at by failing to take into consideration relevant material and circular of Board. In reply, learned counsel for Revenue contended that no question of law arose out of order passed by Tribunal. Having heard learned counsel for parties, we have come to conclusion that following question of law does arise in this case: " Whether, on facts and in circumstances of case, there was material before Income-tax Appellate Tribunal for holding that sum of Rs. 35,000 credited in account of Smt. Shilabai represented income of assessee for assessment year 1978-79 from undisclosed sources? " application is accordingly allowed. Tribunal is directed to state case and to refer aforesaid question of law to this court for its opinion. In circumstances of case, parties shall bear their own costs of this application. *** NIRMAL DAS JASSUMAL v. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Metadata

Judgment