9911796707
TMI Blog1973 (12) TMI 11X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ern College of Engineering and Technology " at Chalakudy in Kerala State. She filed a return on January 15, 1964, declaring a loss of Rs. 19,819 for the assessment year 1963-64, a return on February 19, 1965, declaring a net loss of Rs. 28,004 for 1964-65 and a return on December 3, 1965, admitting an income of Rs. 345 under the head " property " and a loss of Rs. 9,896 under the head " business " for the assessment year 1965-66. She used to collect monies from students of the college ranging between Rs. 4,500 and Rs. 7,500 for arranging for their overseas training and employment. On a scrutiny of the account the Income-tax Officer found that though the assessee had collected the aforesaid amounts by way of deposits, she had not returned th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not liable to be treated as income. To subvert this argument the department pointed out that the assessee herself had agreed to the inclusion of Rs. 45,654 and Rs. 22,000 as income for the assessment years 1964-65 and 1965-66 and in the face of that it is not up to the assessee to contend otherwise. The Tribunal found that the admission was made by the assessee, only on the advice of her counsel and since the department had not acted on the admission to its prejudice, it was open to the assessee to withdraw it. The Tribunal further observed that the surplus amount in the hands of the assessee was impressed with the character of trust money, and did not partake of the nature of revenue receipts. So holding, the Tribunal quashed the order o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rplus amount in her hands under the above account was in the nature of a trust fund refundable or returnable to the party. Reliance was placed very much by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner on the admission of the assessee that Rs. 22,000 was not refunded to the students. It is stated that she agreed to the said amount of Rs. 22,000 being treated as income. It is worthwhile to remember in this connection that during all the relevant years the assessee had taken the consistent stand that the deposits were returnable to the persons concerned after meeting the expenses, and the surplus, therefore, should not be assessed as income. During the year in question she happened to make the admission under a misconception of the attendant facts a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for that purpose certain other material besides the factum of surrender that the amounts in dispute were the undisclosed income of the assessee. " So also in the present case, the admission was wrong and it was for the department to prove positively on other material that there was concealment of income. Being a quasi-criminal proceeding, the burden is entirely on the department. Apart from the so-called admission, there is no material to hold that the income was concealed. We, therefore, answer the question in the affirmative, i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the department. A copy of this judgment with the seal of the court, and under the signature of the Registrar will be sent to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
