TMI Blog1985 (7) TMI 47X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Officer noted that aforesaid Manherlal, Rameshchandra and Bai Reva became partners in S.Y. 2020, corresponding to the assessment year 1965-66 and the new firm carried on a business as wholesalers in coconut in the name and style of M/s. Rameshchandra Manherlal Company. It was further found by him that the capital introduced by these persons in the firm was transferred by cross-entries from their accounts with the Hindu undivided family and they had failed to prove that they had made any independent contributions. The Income-tax Officer, therefore, included the share income from this firm of these partners in the assessment of the assessee-Hindu undivided family for the assessment year 1965-66. Accordingly, for the remaining three years also, he clubbed the share income of these partners with the income of the Hindu undivided family. The assessee, therefore, carried the matter in appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. On behalf of the assessee, it was contended that the amounts withdrawn by the said Shri Rameshchandra and Manherlal from the funds of the Hindu undivided family were used by them for the purposes of purchasing ornaments and the capital contributions ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ax Officer by his report of December 6, 1972, certified these findings where, for the reasons stated in the said report, he refused to accept the version of the said Manherlal, Rameshchandra and Bai Reva. According to the Income-tax Officer, the evidence collected by him disclosed that there was very little possibility for the alleged lenders to save amounts from their meagre net earnings from their lands which would enable them to advance moneys. The Income-tax Officer also emphasised in this behalf that these alleged lenders have themselves obtained some advances from the Agricultural Credit Society of which they were members. The Income-tax Officer could not persuade himself to accept the version of the said two partners, Manherlal and Rameshchandra, about the investment of the amounts drawn from the Hindu undivided family funds in purchase of the ornaments. The reason which weighed in rejecting this version was that the alleged vendors of the ornaments could not satisfy him about the necessity for them to sell the ornaments, and that they were actually in need of the money at the relevant time, nor was there any satisfactory material to show as to how these vendors had acquired ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n of proceedings in the case of the Hindu undivided family for including the income of the said Shri Rameshchandra and Shri Manherlal started much later than the filing of the return together with the aforesaid statement of account of the firm. This, in the opinion of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, went a long way to establish the genuineness of the accounts. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner also examined the version of the investment of the amounts drawn by these two partners from the funds of the Hindu undivided family in purchase of the ornaments. In the opinion of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, there was no cogent and satisfactory reason for rejecting the oral evidence of the vendors of these ornaments who were examined before the Income-tax Officer and the documentary evidence produced in the form of receipts of payment of the price of these ornaments. The reasons that these vendors could not explain as to why they were required to sell the ornaments, or their failure to produce some written evidence as to when they acquired these ornaments, cannot be said to be a compelling and a just reason for rejecting this evidence. As regards Bai Reva's explanation, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ri Tribhovandas Vithaldas ? (2) Whether the Tribunal has erred in not following correctly the general principle of Hindu law relevant to the point at issue and that of the Income-tax Act as to the meaning or interpretation of income and the entity in whose hands assessable ? (3) Whether the Tribunal was justified in applying the Supreme Court's decision referred to in its order to this case instead of holding that the same was distinguishable looking to the facts and circumstances involved in this case and whether the finding in question is reasonable and based on evidence on record?" After hearing at length the learned advocate for the assessee as well as the learned counsel for the Revenue, we, however, unfortunately find ourselves unable to answer the questions. The reason for our inability is, with respect to the Tribunal, its cryptic order since it is on the finding of fact made by the Tribunal that we have to answer the question of law arising from the order of the Tribunal. It is axiomatic to say that the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is a fact-finding forum and, therefore, it is necessary for it that every fact for and against must have been considered with due care a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
