Case Details

Citation(s)
1968 SLG 204 1968 SLD 204 (1968) 68 ITR 209
Supreme Court of India
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1165 OF 1966, APRIL 17, 1967
J.C. SHAH, S.M. SIKRI AND V. RAMASWAMI, JJ
S.T. Desai and A.N. Kirpal for the Appellant. T.V. Viswanatha Iyer, R. Ganapathy Iyer, R.N. Sachthey and S.P. Nayyar for the
Respondent

Raja Sharda Narain Singh

v.

Commissioner of INCOME TAX

Law:

Section:

Section 69A, read with section 256 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1961 (Corresponding to section 66 of Indian Income-tax Act, 1922) - Unexplained moneys - ITO included in assessee's income a sum credited in estate treasury of assessee - AAC excluded that amount from assessment - On appeal, Tribunal restored ITO's order and observed that it was revenue income from undisclosed sources pertaining to accounting period 28-9-1947 to 30-9-1948 - Tribunal refused to make reference under section 66(1) of 1922 Act and High Court also refused to call for reference under section 66(2) of 1922 Act - Whether Tribunal considered question whether income could be held to be income of relevant accounting year, that question was a wide question and included aspect which was put before Supreme Court - Held, yes - Whether question of assessability of aforesaid sum not in assessment year 1949-50 on basis of accounting period but only in assessment year 1948-49 with reference to financial year, arose out of Tribunal's order - Held, yes FACTS The ITO having found certain sum having been credited in the estate treasury of the assessee, included the said sum in the assessee's total income. On appeal, the AAC excluded the amount from the assessment. On revenue's appeal, the Tribunal restored the order of the ITO and observed that it was the revenue income from undisclosed sources pertaining to the accounting period 28-9-1947 to 30-9-1948, relevant for assessment year 1949-50. It also refused to make a reference under section 66(1), and the High Court also refused to call for reference under section 66(2). On appeal to Supreme Court: HELD Assessee referred to CIT v. P. Darolia & Sons [1955] 27 ITR 515 , CIT v. Sheolal Ramlal [1958] 33 ITR 47 , and Sushil Chandra Ghose v. ITO [1959] 35 ITR 379 in support of the proposition that if undisclosed income was found to be from some unknown source other than the regular business of the assessee, the financial year had to be taken as the previous year for such income. He was certainly entitled to rely on them to show that a serious question of law arose out of the order of the Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal considered the question whether the…
πŸ”’
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