COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX Vs. HENDRA S L

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WHEN the application was called out for hearing, none was present on behalf of the assessee. In the circumstances, we requested Mr. Jetley, learned counsel for the Revenue, to take us through the order of the Tribunal and the relevant facts and material on record to satisfy ourselves as to whether the questions really required consideration. Both the Commissioner of Wealth -tax (Appeals) and the Tribunal, it is seen, accepted the assessee's explanation for his inability to pay the self -assessment tax and treating the same to be reasonable and sufficient explanation. The explanation was that he was not able to pay the tax on account of financial stringency caused primarily on account of the fact that his property in the shape of open land with some structure worth about Rs. 1 crore was acquired by the Government in the year 1971. However, the award was given on August 29, 1986, only, when an amount of Rs. 38,34,228 was awarded as compensation. As soon as the award was passed, the assessee requested the concerned authority to pay a sum of Rs. 13 lakhs out of it to the Sales Tax Department, another sum of Rs. 13 lakhs to the Income -tax Department and the balance only to him to enable him to discharge his other liabilities. Mr. Jetley, however, pointed out that this was not the complete -story. The assessee had suppressed certain facts. The assessee., it was pointed out, had purchased properties and made other investments approximately of the amount of Rs. 34 lakhs during the period from April, 1975, to March, 1983, and that if the assessee had any intention of discharging his obligation under section 15B, he could have easily discharged the same.

(2.) IT may be that, on the fuller facts being placed, the Tribunal would have come to some other conclusion. We, however, find it difficult to hold that the Tribunal's accepting the assessee's explanation in the circumstances mentioned above is not a reasonable or possible conclusion, particularly as it is a finding of fact on which the Tribunal came to the conclusion on applying the criteria laid down by the Supreme Court in Hindustan Steel Ltd., v. State of Orissa : [1972]83ITR26(SC) . Accordingly, the rule is discharged.