Case Details

Citation(s)
1976 SLG 549 1976 SLD 549 (1976) 105 ITR 331
Bombay High Court
I.T. REFERENCE No. 4 OF 1965 JULY 2, 1974
KANTAWALA, C.J. AND TULZAPURKAR, J.
F.N. Kaka for the Applicant. R.J. Joshi for the
Respondent.

Ram Kumar Jalan

v.

Commissioner of IncomE tax

Law:

Section:

Section 143 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (Corresponding to section 23 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922) - Assessment - Additions to income - Assessment year 1949-50 - In order to prove genuineness of a credit entry in account books, assessee requested that summons be issued to creditor at address given by him - Summons issued by post by ITO were returned as "not known" - Assessee requested for issuing fresh summons at same address but ITO did not do so and treated amount of credit as assessee's income from undisclosed sources - Whether question of issuing fresh summons could arise only if address given earlier was erroneous - Held, yes - Whether, since this was not case, ITO was justified in treating amount credited in account of said creditor as income of assessee from undisclosed sources - Held, yes FACTS For the relevant assessment year, the Income-tax Officer assessed the assessee-firm on the total income of Rs. 1.46 lakhs which, inter alia, included a sum of Rs. 25 thousand as assessee's income from undisclosed sources. This amount was found as a deposit in the account of one 'SLM' in the books of account of the assessee. The contention of the assessee was that this was a genuine loan taken from 'SLM'. The Income-tax Officer was not satisfied with the explanation and called upon the assessee to furnish the particulars of the depositor. In view of the information given by the assessee, a summon was sent through post but it was returned unserved with a postal remarks that the addressee was "not known". On receipt of an intimation from the ITO to this effect, the assessee registered for issuing fresh summons. As the address given of the depositor was identical with the one furnished earlier, and as the summons were returned earlier with the postal remark that the addressee was not known, the Income-tax Officer did not consider it necessary to issue a fresh summons. As no corroborative evidence was produced by the assessee, the Income-tax Officer rejected the correctness of the entry in the books of the assessee and treated it as income from undisclosed sources. On appeal, the AAC accepted the assessee's contention for issuing fresh summons. On revenue's…
šŸ”’
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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