TMI Blog1967 (7) TMI 58X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssioner of Income-tax should be answered in favour of the assessee. We are concerned with the assessment year 1958-59, the corresponding accounting year having ended on October 23, 1957. The assessee in the relevant year was a firm of partnership carrying on business at Madras. In the course of the assessment proceedings, four credit entries, two in November, 1956, one in February, 1957, and the last in March, 1957, were found entered in the accounts against certain named persons. On each of the corresponding dates of credits, the cash balance in the books was far less than them. The assessee's explanation was that the credits were received from certain businessmen from North India, who came to Madras for making purchases, and, while en rou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ich it failed to discharge. It is argued before us that once the Income-tax Officer disbelieved or declined to accept the explanation of the assessee as true and determined that, on the basis of the credit entries, a certain amount should be added as undisclosed income, it followed from that finding that, to that extent, the assessee had concealed the particulars of such income or deliberately furnished inaccurate particulars of such income. We do not think that we can accede to such a broad proposition. The gist of the offence under section 28(1)(c) is concealment of the particulars of the assessee's income or deliberately furnishing inaccurate particulars of such income. The question in each case will be whether there is material to fin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... context, said this : " Now, the assessee is not charged with having given a false explanation. This is not the gist of the offence under section 28(1)(c). The gist of the offence under section 28(1)(c) is that the assessee concealed the particulars of his income or deliberately furnished inaccurate particulars of such income. Therefore, the department must establish that the receipt of Rs. 15,203 constitutes ' income ' of the assessee. There is not an iota of evidence on the record except the explanation given by the assessee, which explanation has been found to be false." We are in agreement with the principle of these observations, that is to say, that a finding of concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars cannot be founded ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
