COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. SOWBHAGMULL MAHAVIRCHAND N

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE references from the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal concern the assessment of one Sowbhagmull Mahavirchand (hereinafter called the assessee") for the assessment year 1971-72, and also proceedings for penalty against him for the same assessment year.

(2.) THE assessee was carrying on shroff business, that is to say, business in jewelry and money-lending at Villupuram. He was also a partner in some textile concerns in Madras. One Janardhanam, who described himself as a clerk of the assessee, was apprehended by the Central Excise authorities in March, 1971, at Thanjavur railway station, carrying 25 bars of gold with foreign markings. This Janardhanam gave a statement then to the effect that he was a clerk of assessee, that the assessee was indulging in business in contraband foreign gold and that the stock of 25 bars of gold which he was carrying belonged to the assessee. One Govindaraja Chettiar was said to be a person to whom the 25 bars of gold were meant to be delivered. This Govindaraja Chettiar also gave a statement to the Central Excise Department at the time of a raid conducted in his house. In his statement, Govindaraja Chettiar admitted that he had had some transactions with the assessee in gold. In the course of his statement, Govindaraja Chettiar referred to his having received from the assessee 25 bars of gold in February 1971. After obtaining the statements of Janardhanam and Govindaraja Chettiar, the Central Excise authorities examined the assessee. THE assessee denied that he had any dealings in any contraband gold of foreign origin. Subsequently however, the assessee made a different statements admitting his involvement in the transaction relating to 25 bars of gold delivered to Govindaraja Chettiar in February 1971, when he was apprehended in Thanjavur railway station by the Central Excise authorities. While admitting that he was implicated in these transactions, the assessee, however, denied that he was implicated in these transactions, the assessee, however, denied that he was the owner of the bar of gold. He stated that some individuals from Madras had entrusted him with these bars of gold to be sold by him on commission. He, however, stated that he did not know the names and addresses of those who supplied him with those bars of gold.

(3.) WHETHER the Appellate Tribunal's finding that the addition of Rs. 59,000 sustained by it under 'other sources' was not the assessee's concealed income is based on relevant materials and a reasonable view to take on the facts of the case ?"