9911796707
TMI Blog1968 (10) TMI 34X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, at the instance of the assessee and the question of law which is now before us is whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner was justified in law in enhancing the revised figure of income computed by the Income-tax Officer by a sum of Rs. 3,822. The material facts are these: The assessee was a transpor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fficer was that the original income from the lorry business which was determined to be Rs. 8,600 became smaller to the extent of Rs. 3,822. The assessee preferred an appeal from this assessment to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and that appeal proved unfortunate for him for the reason that in the proceedings in that appeal the Appellate Assistant Commissioner proposed to enhance the income ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat view. That decision in Natarajan's case can have no application to the present case in which the notice under section 34 proposed to make a reassessment of the total income of the assessee in respect of only one business which comprised the transport and the lorry businesses. The assessee did not have two distinct businesses but was carrying on only one business and that business related to th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... had previously assessed. That being so, and since in the notice issued by the Income-tax Officer under section 34 he intimated the assessee that there would be a reassessment of the total income, it was not impossible for the Income-tax Officer to say that the income from the lorry business was smaller but that the income from the transport business was higher and by that process reach the conclus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
