TMI Blog1951 (6) TMI 22X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rm Tulsi Ram Sham Sundar is a firm dealing in cloth at Amritsar. They also own a business C. L. Nayyar Sons which do business in yarn. This firm has interest in three the registered partnership firms (a) Tulsi Ram Karam Chand of Amritsar, (b) Tulsi Ram Chuni Lal of Bombay and (c) Tulsi Ram Kanhaya Lal of Ahmedabad. In making their returns for the income according during the year 1943-44 the firm declared the income from their cloth firm, Tulsi Ram Sham Sundar, at ₹ 34,061. The return also made mention of the fact that the firm had a share or interest in three other registered firms (the names of which have been mentioned above). The assessees share of the income in the firms (a) Tulsi Ram Karam Chand of Amritsar and (b) Tulsi Ram Ch ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t discovered the evasion in consequence of any definite price of information received by hum after the original assessment was completed. This contention was rejected by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal on appeal but on application under Section 66 (1) of the Income Tax Act the Tribunal agreed to refer the question noted above for our decision. The contention of Mr. Gosian, who appeared on behalf of the assessees, is that in their original returns the assessees revealed the fact that they had a share in the Ahmedabad firm. They even stated that the extend of their share was 7/16th. The Income Tax Officer was therefore in full possession of the relevant facts and all he had to do was make an equity from the Income Tax Office either did n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rmation when the reply from Ahmedabad came, the Income Tax Officer was led to believe that some of the assessees income had escaped assessment. The second argument, however, has very little force in view of the wording of the question which has been referred to us. The Tribunal appears to assume that the statement of the assessees in the original returns could not be treated as a definite piece of information for the proposes of applying Section 34 and the question as formulated related only to the figures received from Ahmedabad. Therefore the sole question for question for our decision is whether these figures or the reply received from Ahmedabad amounts to a definite piece of information. Counsel have drawn our attention to a number ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... him subsequently and so he was not entitled to revise the assessment under the provisions of Section 34. In Badar Shoe Store v. Commissioner of Income Tax the learned Judged laid stress on the phrase definite information and observed that this phrase had been used in Section 34 to protect the subject gins the assault by the Income Tax Officer based on mere suspicion. In view of these authorities it appears to me that the correct interpretation of Section 34 is that the evasion or escape of Income Tax must be discovered as a consequence of fresh price of definite information received by the Income Tax Officer and where the Income Tax Officer has already completed an assessment upon certain date he cannot use the same date for revising ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
