COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ANOTHER Vs. KRISHNAMURTHY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE revenue has preferred this appeal by challenging the order dated 31 -3 -2005 passed in ITA No. 3480/Bang/2004 by raising the following substantial questions of law: 1. Whether the Tribunal was correct in holding that there was no concealment of particulars of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars without taking into consideration the fact that in the survey conducted under Section 133A on 23 -6 -2000 value of stock worth Rs. 5,10,000 was not reflected in the books maintained by the Assessee and the subsequent return filed on 29 -1 -2001 also did not reflect this amount of Rs. 5,10,000 resulting in recording of perverse finding for not taking into consideration material facts.

(2.) WHETHER the Tribunal was correct in holding that on detection in survey the Assessees father offering the difference in stock as income and thereafter the Assessee offering the difference in stock not declared in the return as the income of the assess during assessment proceeding would amount to a voluntary act which would not amount to concealment of income.

(3.) WE have heard the learned Counsel on both sides and perused the material on record.