2007 (5) TMI 242

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d 1983-84, M/s. E. K. Vijayan and others, Kozhikode, was an assessee under the Act. Shri M. N. Moni was the executor of the estates of the assessee. The assessee owned an estate, namely, "Woodland Estate". The assessee derived agricultural income from coffee, pepper, arecanut, coconut, cardamom and cocoa. For the assessment years i.e., 1982-83 and 1983-84 the assessee filed returns disclosing agricultural income of Rs. 1,22,520 and Rs. 2,88,996 respectively. The Assessing Officer was of the view that the returns filed did not reflect the correct and complete picture as the assessee had not disclosed the income from coffee during 1982-83 season and income disclosed of pepper was low and, in fact no income was disclosed from orange, arecanuts .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 9 acres of land. An application for reference in terms of section 60 of the Act was filed. It was rejected by the Tribunal. Original petitions were filed before the High Court which by order dated April 1, 1996, directed the Tribunal to refer one of the questions formulated by the assessee and to refer question No.1 along with the statement of facts: Accordingly, the reference was made which was disposed of by the impugned order. The question that was referred reads as follows: "Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, is the finding of the Tribunal that income from 60.79 acres of unregistered coffee area is not included in the accounts of the assessee supported by any material or evidence?" By the impugned order, the H .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d only through M/s. Pierce Leslie, there is no basis for the Department to state that the entire income has not been returned." No reason which weighed with the High Court to upset the orders of the assessing authority and the appellate authorities is discernible. Findings of fact were recorded by the said authorities. In a reference there is no scope for interference with the factual findings, unless the findings are per se without reason or basis, perverse and/or contrary to materials on record. Merely because a different view on facts may be available to be drawn, that cannot be a ground to interfere with the findings of fact recorded by the authorities. In cases of reference, only a question of law can be answered. Where the determi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X