TMI Blog1979 (7) TMI 162X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... annath Sharan from his HUF fund during the financial year 1972-73 Rs. 78,000 3. Gift from Mrs. P. Shrivastava during the financial year 1972-73 Rs. 5,000 4. Loan from Dr. J. Sharan from his individual fund during the financial year 1973-74 Rs. 22,000 5. Loan from Dr. J. Shrran from his individual fund during the financial year 1974-75 Rs. 32,000 6. Loan from Dr. UlK.Saran during financial year 1975-76 Rs. 8,000 7. Loan from Dr. J.Sharan from his individual fund during the financial year 1975-76 Rs. 7,000 . . Rs. 1,62,000 The main source was indicated as being the loan from HUF during the financial year ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Sharan HUF. The tree appeals were filed before the AAC and the AAC by a consolidated order deleted the addition from the assessment of Dr. J. Sharan, individual and Dr. J. Sharan, HUF whereas the addition was confirmed in the hands of the assessee. There was no appeal by the Department in the case of HUF. But the Department filed the appeal against the deletion of income in the hands of Dr. J. Sharan individual whereas the assessee filed the appeal against the sustenance of addition of Rs. 78,000 before the Tribunal. However, the Tribunal vide its order in ITA No. 1353 and 1598 (Pat) of 1976-77, confirmed the addition in the hands of the assessee but dismissed the departmental appeal in the case of Dr. J. Sharan, individual. 3. The ITO af ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... He, accordingly, confirmed the penalty. 4. Shri Rajgharia, the counsel of the assessee appeared and filed a paper book which contained the copies of the order of the AAC, copy of the order of the Tribunal for the asst. yr. 1973-74 for Smt. Ashoka Sharan, copy of the show cause report before the IAC, statement of Dr. J. Sharan and the copy of the ITO s order for the asst. yrs. 1968-69 to 1972-73. The counsel of the assessee Shri Rajgharia made two submissions. The first submission of Shri Rajgharia was that the order passes by the IAC was illegal and, therefore that may be set aside. He stated that the IAC passed the order by virtue of the provisions contained under s. 274(2) of the Act. He stated that the IAC passed the order on 29th Mar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ave fund. Consequently, the departmental representative urged that the penalty was rightly imposed by the IAC. The departmental representative on the first argument of the assessee urged that the argument of the counsel is not correct and the IAC his jurisdiction over the case and, therefore, the order passed by him was legal. 5. The first argument of the counsel of the assessee is that the order passed by the IAC is illegal and it should be set aside. The provision of s. 274(2), before it was amended by Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 1975, stood as hereunder: "(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in cl. (iii) of sub-s. (1) of s. 271, if in a case failing under cl. (e) of that sub-section, the amount of income (as determined by the IT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was in the name of the assessee. The assessee invested Rs. 1,62,000 in the construction out of which the source for Rs. 84,000 had been accepted. The balance of 78,000 was indicated by the assessee that she got loan from Dr. J. Sharan, HUF. Dr. J. Sharan, HUF was assessed to tax for the asst. yrs. 1968-69 to 1972-73. Dr. J. Sharan appeared as a Karta and admitted the loan given to the assessee. Under the above circumstance, simply disbelieving this statement and adding Rs. 78,000 to the income of the assessee it would be difficult to hold that the assessee concealed the income of Rs. 78,000. The IAC correctly has only relied upon the assessment order but he has not brought any material to indicate that the HUF, though was assessed for the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
