9911796707
TMI Blog1972 (9) TMI 11X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nnan Kunhi, Chathunni, Velayudhan, Pappu and Ramakrishnan. Kannan Kunhi is the eldest son. He was a permanent resident of Ceylon. He had a business in toddy in Ceylon in partnership with others. On August 17, 1950, a business in toddy was started in Kerala. The licence for this business was in the name of Kannan Kunhi. On the same day there was a credit entry in the books of account for the toddy business for a sum of Rs. 46,563. This business was managed by Chathunni. The assessee was a Hindu undivided family. The assessee purchased an item of property on May 19, 1950, for a sum of Rs. 14,250 and another item of property for Rs. 3,000 on February 16, 1951. The Income-tax Officer brought these amounts, namely, Rs. 46,563, Rs. 14,250 and Rs. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... during the previous year ended March 31, 1951, relevant for the assessment year 1951-52 is valid and justified in law ? " The Tribunal accordingly stated the case and submitted the aforementioned question to the High Court. The High Court has answered that question in the negative and in favour of the assessee. Aggrieved by that decision, the Commissioner of Income-tax, Kerala, has brought this appeal. Mr. B. Sen, learned counsel for the department, formulated before us three questions of law for decision. They are : (1) the question of law ordered to be referred by the High Court did not arise from the order of the Tribunal ; (2) the question as framed did not give jurisdiction to the High Court to go into the findings of fact ; and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llows : ' Other sources : Income from undisclosed sources. An amount of Rs. 46,563 has been brought into the books for the new toddy business. The assessee was asked to explain the nature and source of these funds. The explanation furnished is not at all satisfactory, and so I will treat this amount as income from undisclosed sources '. " Before going into the questions formulated by Mr. B. Sen, it is necessary to examine whether the justice of the case requires our interference with the judgment of the High Court in exercise of our discretionary jurisdiction under article 136 of the Constitution. It may be noted that the assessee had explained that Rs. 46,563 invested for the purpose of toddy business in Kerala was partly made up from ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
