BHOJRAJ KISHANCHAND Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this reference under S. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961, the Tribunal has referred the following question to this Court for its opinion :

(2.) IN our opinion, the question referred to us is a question of fact and not a question of law. In the reference jurisdiction, it is not open to this Court to re appreciate the evidence and record findings of fact. It is well settled that the Tribunal is final fact finding authority. We are, therefore, inclined to return the reference unanswered. The learned counsel for the assessee has, however, requested the Court to examine the matter from limited point of view, viz., as to whether there was any material before the Tribunal so as to warrant the finding of fact referred to in the above question. In alternative to our abovereferred conclusion, we shall do so. In our opinion, the Tribunal had material before it on the basis of which it could arrive at the conclusion referred to in the question and even from this point of view there is no merit in the grievance made on behalf of the assessee.

(3.) AS regards the nature and source of the abovereferred amount of 3,57,000 Hong Kong Dollars shown in the balance sheet as capital of the assessee as on 31st March, 1959, the proceedings for the asst. year 1959 60 were reopened. On 31st Dec., 1968, a notice was issued by ITO concerned under S. 148 r/w S. 147(a) of the IT Act, 1961. The assessee filed a writ petition in this Court impugning the said notice. In the writ proceedings, a stay order was granted by this Court on 9th March, 1969. As a result of stay order, the said reassessment proceedings could not be resumed or completed. The said writ petition was ultimately withdrawn by the assessee on 30th Aug., 1974.