TMI Blog1994 (7) TMI 3X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... evidence ? " The assessment year in question is 1962-63. The assessee is a man aging director of Pearl Cycle Industries Ltd. He also holds a one-fourth share in the registered firm named, E. S. Pearey Lal. While completing the assessment, the Income-tax Officer made an addition of sum of Rs. 93,000 as income of the assessee from undisclosed sources. In the appeal filed by the assessee, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner upheld the said addition of Rs. 93,000. In further appeal filed by the assessee, the Tribunal reduced the income from undisclosed sources from Rs. 93,000 to Rs. 42,000. The sum of Rs. 93,000 comprises : (1) Rs. 78,000 credited in the assessee's favour by E. S. Pearey Lal in its accounts ; and (2) repayment of Rs. 15, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not have saved anything at all from the amounts given to her for the purpose of household expenses. Taking into consideration the broad probabilities, the Tribunal held that a sum of Rs. 5,000 was available with Mrs. Kumar out of a sum of Rs. 10,000 stated by her to have been received as gift at the time of her marriage. Regarding the saving from amounts received towards household expenses, the Tribunal held that though it was difficult to calculate as to what the actual household expenses would have been but having regard to the probabilities and the fact that Mrs. Kumar had been meeting all her personal expenses separately the Tribunal found that it could reasonably be held that Mrs. Kumar could have saved a sum of Rs. 15,000 by the end o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ar has to be judged in the light of the broad probabilities and the Tribunal having gone through the record came to the conclusion that a sum. of Rs. 51,000 had been explained. We are unable to accept the contention that there was no evidence before the Tribunal to reduce the income from undisclosed sources from Rs. 93,000 to Rs. 43,000. The finding of fact reached by the Tribunal cannot be said to be based on no evidence. It also cannot be held that the Tribunal has ignored or misread any evidence or that its findings are based on any irrelevant material. The first question is, accordingly, answered in the affirmative in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. The second question is answered in the negative against the Revenue an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
