TMI Blog1987 (2) TMI 51X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and is not the above finding wrong and unreasonable in law and also based on probabilities and surmises ? 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is Tight in law in holding that 'there is no reliable evidence in the case to show that the assessee has a stock of unaccounted synthetic sheets' and is not the above finding wrong and perverse in law and also based on probabilities and surmises ? 4. Whether the Tribunal is right in law and fact in deleting the addition of Rs. 50,000 relying on probabilities and without taking any evidence either by itself or from authorities below ? " The year of assessment, the relevant previous years ending August 31, 1969, for business and March 31, 1970, for income ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... After enquiry, the assessing authority held thus: " In my opinion, the assessee cannot be considered to have discharged the onus of proving that the stock declared was not synthetic sheets but mere insertion sheets merely because the bank agent has stated that the bank is relying mainly on the declarations given by the parties. Moreover, the fact that the synthetic sheets have been completely released on December 21, 1972, i.e., after the enquiries have been started, clearly establish that the assessee has tried to suppress the evidence." On appeal, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner declared that the assessee, in order to obtain the key loan accommodation from the Central Bank, had pledged only ordinary insertion sheets and not syn ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... different types of rubber, we depend on the party's declaration ". Coupled with this is the telling circumstance that within two days of the issue of the letter dated December 19, 1972, to the bank enquiring about the nature of the articles on December 21, 1972, the assessee took delivery of the pledged articles from the bank. Having taken delivery of the goods, the assessee should have made them available to the assessing authority for verification. On the other hand, nothing was heard about these goods thereafter. The goods, it is said, were disposed of by the assessee without notice to the assessing authority. This one circumstance coupled with the declaration of the assessee contained in the " pledge documents " that the articles pledge ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to rebut the presumption based on the solemn declaration of the assessee coupled with the conduct of the assessee in disposing of the pledged articles without making them available for verification by the assessing authority. It should be remembered that these articles were disposed of in the midst of the enquiry and without notice to the Income-tax Officer. A prudent businessman, in the circumstances in which the assessee is placed, would definitely have made them available for inspection by the Income-tax Officer. The haste with which the assessee took delivery of these articles from the bank and the haste with which these articles were disposed of even without notice to the assessing authority, coupled with the declaration of the assesse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... adverse piece of evidence that made him keep silent. " Similarly, the Tribunal wrongly cast the burden of proof on the assessing authority. A reference in this connection to the following observations in the order of the Tribunal is relevant: " But the Income-tax Officer could have questioned and asked him to shed his evasive methods and give a straight answer whether the goods were synthetic sheets, particularly when the evidentiary value of the pledge documents had been belittled by the evasive answer given in writing by the bank agent. The controversies could have been given a quietus if the assessee had made available the pledged goods which he got released on December 21, 1972, for verification by the Income-tax Officer. It s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ely and positively said that the goods pledged were synthetic sheets. He gave an evasive answer because he still feared that truth may come out by other evidence and in that event, he should not be accused of having given a false certificate." From the discussions above, it is clear that the Tribunal has not given cogent reasons for upsetting the findings of the Income-tax Officer. It omitted to take into account relevant materials borne out by record. The findings are based on conjectures and surmises. The Tribunal has cast the burden of proof wrongly on the Income-tax Officer. It has even refused to take into account relevant considerations like the conduct of the assessee in not making the pledged goods after release from the bank, ava ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
