SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1974 Supreme(Cal) 77

HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
SABYASACHI MUKHERJI, R. N. PYNE
INCOME-TAX OFFICER, m WARD - Appellant
Versus
TEXTILE MILLS AGENTS P. LTD. - Respondent
Appeal 185  Of  1972
Decided On : MARCH 18, 1974

The ITO has jurisdiction to issue a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, if he has formed the requisite belief that income of the assessee has escaped assessment or has been underassessed as a result of any omission or failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts relevant for the assessment, and if there are materials for the ITO to form that belief and these materials have a rational nexus to the formation of the belief.

Headnote:

INCOME TAX - Reopening of assessment - Conditions precedent - Belief of ITO that income escaped assessment - Materials for forming belief - Confession of alleged money-lender - Subsequent finding of AAC that transaction was genuine - Effect - Whether ITO had jurisdiction to issue notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Fact of the Case:

The assessee claimed deductions for interest paid to various parties, including Murshidabad Jute Co. The ITO disallowed the interest, relying on confessions made by Sewlal Jain, the proprietor of Murshidabad Jute Co., that the transaction was fictitious. The AAC allowed the interest, finding that the transaction was genuine. The ITO issued a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, reopening the assessment for the year in which the interest was claimed.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the ITO had jurisdiction to issue the notice under Section 148. The confession of Sewlal Jain, coupled with the finding of the ITO in the subsequent assessment year that the transaction was not genuine, constituted materials upon which a reasonable man could have formed the belief that the assessee had not fully and truly disclosed all material facts at the time of the original assessment.

Issues: Whether the conditions precedent for the issuance of the notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, were fulfilled.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the conditions precedent for the issuance of the notice under Section 148 were fulfilled because: * The ITO had formed the requisite belief that income of the assessee had escaped assessment or had been underassessed as a result of any omission or failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts relevant for the assessment. * There were materials for the ITO to form that belief. * These materials had a rational nexus to the formation of the belief, if any, formed in this case.

Final Decision: The court allowed the appeal and set aside the judgment and order of the trial court, dismissing the assessee's application under Article 226 of the Constitution.

SABYASACHI MUKHARJI, J.

( 1 ) THE assessment for the assessment year 1963-64 for income-tax was completed on August 31, 1965. In the said assessment, the assessee claimed deductions on account of payment of certain interest to various parties including, inter alia, the Murshidabad Jute Co. It appears that the account in the name of Murshidabad Jute Co. originated for the first time, according to the assessee, in the relevant financial year for the assessment year 1963-64 when credits aggregating to Rs. 90,000 figured on nine different dates. The said interest was allowed. Thereafter, there was assessment of the assessee for the assessment year 1964-65, which was completed on December 30, 1967. In the said assessment, the ITO examined the accounts and came to the conclusion that the transaction with Murshidabad Jute Co. was fictitious and for this purpose he relied on certain confessions alleged to have been made by one Sewlal Jain, who is the proprietor of the said Murshidabad Jute Co. The ITO, accordingly, disallowed the said interest. He recorded that what Sewlal Jain had done was to lend the name of Murshidabad Jute Co. to the assessee in order to accommodate the assessee to introduce its concealed income in the form of loans in the accounting year corresponding to the assessment year 1963-64. Therefore, according to the said ITO, the credings aggregating to Rs. 90,000 figuring in the books of the assessee-company in the name of Murshidabad Jute Co. , in fact, represented concealed income of the assessee. He, accordingly, directed reopening of the assessment under Clause (a) of Section 147 of the I. T. Act, 1961. Thereafter, there was an appeal to the AAC for the assessment year 1964-65 and the AAC passed an order on August 22, 1968. Before that, on March 22, 1968, notice under Section 148 of the I. T. Act, 1961, was issued to the assessee reopening the assessment for the assessment year 1963-64. In the appellate-order of the AAC for the year 1964-65, the AAC observed that the transaction with Murshidabad Jute Co. started from October, 1961, and ended in June, 1962. The AAC further observed that the company had already been on the record of the ITO, Berhampore, and a certified copy of the account had been filed which brought forward a balance of about Rs. 91,802 during the year 1962-63. The AAC was, therefore, of the view that M/s. Murshidabad Jute Co, was a genuine concern and doing genuinely business in jute up to the middle of 1962 and the transaction related to this period. He was, therefore, of the opinion that on the confession of the bogus money-lending after the middle of 1962 no adverse inference could be drawn against the assessee. He, accordingly, allowed the interest which was disallowed by the ITO for the assessment year 1964-65. In this connection, it would be relevant at this stage to set out from the confessions recorded in the assessment year 1964-65 by the ITO by Sewlal Jain. The said confession was made on November 24, 1965, before the ITO. The extracts from the question and answers are hereunder:" Q. What arc your source of income ? a. I am also the proprietor of M/s. Murshidabad Jute Co. , which is having its head office at Jiaganj and branch at 46, Strand Road, Calcutta. This firm was started some time in 2000 Ratlia Jatra as a partnership concern and in about 2010 or 2012 R. J. I became the proprietor of the concern which had main jute purchasing centre at Lalgola in most of the years and had commission agency business in jute in Calcutta till R. J. year ended in the middle of the calendar year 1962. So far as I remember since then there is no business nor Mursliidabad jute except bogus name-lending from its Calcutta branch. Q. Since when you started this business of Jamakharcha ? a. I am carrying on the business of Jamakharcha for about last six or seven years prior to which I carried on really business as stated above. "

( 2 ) THE assessee challenged the notice issued on March 22, 1968, under Secti






Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top