Law:

Section:

JUDGMENT Chagla, CJ. -Though Mr. Kolah has argued this reference with Considerable heat and warmth, it raises a very short and simple question. The assessment year is 1947-48 and the accounting year is the calendar year 1946. It appears that on the 18th January, 1946, the assessee encashed high denomination notes of the face value of Rs. 61,000. The books of account of the assessee showed that there was an opening cash balance on that day of Rs. 72,863-13-3. On the 20th December, 1945, the opening cash balance was Rs. 14,318. On the 2nd January, 1946, the opening cash balance was Rs. 18,395. On the 12th January, 1946, the cash balance was Rs. 69,891. The 12th January, 1946, is an important date because that was the date on which the High Denomination Notes Ordinance came into force. What has been held by the taxing authorities is that the sum of Rs. 61,000 was the income of the assessee from undisclosed sources and the high denomination notes did not represent the business receipts of the assessee. The Tribunal has concurred in this decision to the extent of Rs. 30,000, and the question that arises before us is whether there was any meterial which justified the Tribunal in coming to the conclusion that it did. Now, prima facie, one would have thought the decision of the Tribunal is a decision on a question of fact, and this Court has no jurisdiction to interfere with the findings of fact arrived at by the Tribunal. There is only a limited class of cases in which this Court can interfere with the findings of fact arrived at by the Tribunal and those are cases where this Court is satisfied that there was no evidence on which the Tribunal could have based its decision. Evidence may be direct evidence or it may be circumstantial evidence. It would be open to the Tribunal to infer a fact from circumstances established before it and it would not be open to the Court to disagree with the finding of fact of the Tribunal merely because there was no direct evidence to justify that finding, and the Court would also not interfere with the inference drawn by the Tribunal from the circumstances established unless the Court came to the conclusion that the inference was…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492