O.CHHINNAPPA REDDY, M.R.SHARMA
Hazi Amir Mohd. Mir Ahmed – Appellant
Versus
Commissioner Of Income-tax – Respondent
O.Chinnappa Reddy, J.
1. For the assessment year 1962-63, the Income-tax Officer assessed the assessee on April 21, 1964, on a total income of Rs. 11,510. In the balance-sheet of the assessee, there appeared cash credits in the names of Hundal Dass Vasu Mal, Chopra Trading Company and five others. The assessee produced evidence before the Income-tax Officer about the genuineness of the cash credits. The Income-tax Officer enquired into the genuineness of the cash credits and accepted them as true. It was^bnly thereafter that he completed the assessment. Later, a huge hundi racket operating on an all-India basis was unearthed and broken. Income-tax Officers all over the country got busy and started further probes irtto the affairs of various assessees. Some of the creditors shown in the balance-sheet of the assessee made confessional statements to the effect that they were lending names and not money. Thereupon, the Income-tax Officer issued a notice to the assessee under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, reopened the assessment and added a sum of Rs. 1,60,000 to the income of the assessee. The appeals filed by the assessee to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.