COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. SUBHASH CHANDER AGARWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, by the Commissioner of Income-tax praying that the Appellate Tribunal be directed to draw up a statement of the case, on as many as six questions, as stated at the end of the application.

(2.) Questions Nos. 1 and 2 relate to the contravention of Rule 46A(1)(d)/3(a) of the Income-tax Rules, 1962, by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner admitted certain affidavits in evidence and called upon the Income-tax Officer to furnish his comments in regard to them. The Income-tax Officer did furnish his comments but no application was made by him to produce the deponent for cross-examination. Now, the grievance is that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner did not afford him an opportunity of cross-examining the deponent. No question of law arises from the order of the Tribunal, inasmuch as a finding of fact was recorded that an opportunity was given by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner to the Income-tax Officer and thus the provisions of Rule 46A were not violated.

(3.) The remaining questions relate to immunity. Under the Voluntary Disclosure of Income and Wealth Ordinance, 1975, the two minor daughters of the assessee declared an income or Rs. 25,000 each. The Income-tax Officer, while investigating the source of that income, made enquiries from the assessee. The contention of the assessee is that the investigation as to the source of income declared by the minor daughters from the assessee is not permitted in the disclosure scheme. The contention of the Revenue was that it is only the declarant who acquires immunity and not the other persons to whom the amount declared belonged and, therefore, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the Tribunal legally erred in having held that the immunity was available to the assessee, the father of the minor daughters. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner clearly refers to a clarification given by the Central Board of Direct Taxes on the enquiry made by the Bharat Chamber of Commerce, Calcutta, wherein the Board clarified that in the disclosure scheme, no investigation would be made either from the declarant or from any other person including the guardian of the minors or husband of the lady. In view of the circular, we are of the view that no stateable question arises.