SUKHLAL BHANWARLAL HUF Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ON the direction of this court passed on August 2, 1988, in Miscellaneous Civil Case No. 174 of 1985, on an application of the assessee, presented under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short "the Act"), the Tribunal has stated the case and referred the undernoted questions of law arising out of the order dated October 26, 1984, passed by the Tribunal in I. T. A. No. 10/Ind. of 1983 for the assessment year 1975-76 :

(2.) THE facts lie in a narrow compass. For the assessment year 1975-76 (previous year ending Diwali, 1974), the assessee was originally assessed in the status of a Hindu undivided family under Section 143(3) of the Act on a total income of Rs. 36,400 and agricultural income of Rs. 4,210. In wealth-tax proceedings, the matter was examined by the appropriate authority and it was noticed that the total wealth as on the valuation date had increased by Rs. 87,000. This formed the basis of the Income-tax Officer's satisfaction that certain income had escaped assessment. He, therefore, documented the reasons and reopened the assessment for the assessment year 1975-76 under Section 147(a) of the Act. THE assessee was noticed and then filed the revised return showing the agricultural income as Rs. 25,000, non-agricultural income Rs. 32,000 and gifts of Rs. 30,000. THE Income-tax Officer partly believed the assessee to the extent of Rs. 26,210 and held that the balance of Rs. 60,790 was unexplained accretion. He, thus, made the addition of Rs. 60,790 to the income of the assessee. He doubted the assertion as regards the receipts from the gift (annexure "A"). THE assessee then filed an appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. In this appeal no ground was taken as to the validity of initiation of proceedings under Section 147(a) of the Act. (annexure "B"). THE Appellate Assistant Commissioner concurred with the Income-tax Officer and dismissed the appeal (annexure "C"). THE assessee then filed an appeal before the Tribunal. THE order of the Tribunal does not contain any discussion about the proceedings under Section 147(a) of the Act. No miscellaneous application under Section 254(2) of the Act was filed for any rectification. THE appeal was dismissed. THE assessee then filed an application under Section 256(1) of the Act in which no question regarding the initiation of proceedings under Section 147(a) was proposed. THE application was rejected. THE assessee then filed an application under Section 256(2) of the Act which was registered in this court as Miscellaneous Civil Case No. 174 of 1985. That was disposed of on August 2, 1988, directing the Tribunal to state the case and refer the aforesaid questions for consideration. In compliance, the Tribunal has referred the aforesaid questions.

(3.) AS the question is referred on direction from this court, we do not consider it proper or necessary as to whether the question is entertainable despite the fact that such a question was not proposed in the application under Section 256(1) of the Act and the Tribunal had no occasion to consider this question as it does not seem to have been pressed before it.