TMI Blog1986 (1) TMI 36X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e-tax Act, 1922 (" the Act "), was worked out at Rs. 1,68,029. The company had not declared any dividend. The Income-tax Officer passed an appropriate order under section 23A. The assessee went up in appeal and succeeded. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner held that the add-backs made by the Income-tax Officer were on the basis that those claimed deductions were not proved. There was no material to show that the unproved items really pertained to actual concealment of income on the part of the assessee. The assessment under section 23A was consequently cancelled. The Revenue went up in appeal to the Tribunal but failed. At the instance of the Revenue, the Tribunal has referred the following question of law for our opinion : " Whether, o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e or in any other law for the time being in force, nothing contained in any declaration made under this section shall be admissible as evidence against the declarant for the purpose of any assessment proceeding or any proceeding relating to imposition of penalty or for the purpose of prosecution under any of the Acts mentioned in sub-section (9) or the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 (27 of 1957), in respect of any amount specified in an order made by the Commissioner under sub-section (4) or, if such amount is altered by an order of the Board under sub-section (6), then such altered amount. " Under this provision, nothing contained in the declaration made under this section shall be admissible in evidence against the declarant for the purpose of an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... applicable. There it was held that for the purpose of section 23A, the commercial or accounting profits have to be taken into consideration to see whether larger amount than that declared by the company could be distributed in view of the smallness of the profits made. If an item of receipt is deliberately omitted from the accounts, it cannot be said that commercial principles prevent that amount being added to the profits in order to arrive at the real commercial or accounting profits. Here, there is no question of any deliberate omission. The claimed deductions were disallowed for lack of proof. That is not the same thing as a deliberate omission from the accounts. Though we are not in a position to uphold the interpretation of the vol ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
