S M TRIVEDI Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a reference made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribu nal, Indore, for answering the question :

(2.) IT appears that initially when the petitioner-assessee approached the Tribunal to make a reference to this court the Tribunal rejected the prayer holding that no question of law arises. Thereafter, the petitioner approached this court under Section 256(2) of the I.T. Act and a Division Bench of this court in Misc. Civil Case No. 110 of 1970 by its order dated 13th August, 1973, directed the Tribunal to state a case on the question quoted above. And in consequence of the direction of this court, the Tribunal has made this reference.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the assessee contended that on the basis of the material the Tribunal was not justified in drawing the inference as according to learned counsel if irrelevant evidence was considered and the question of onus of proof was not considered the finding arrived at by the Tribunal could not be said to be a finding of fact. However, learned counsel could not point out that there was any fact or circumstance which was not considered by the Tribunal which according to him was necessary to be considered. He also could not suggest as to what more should have been produced for consideration before the authorities, even if the burden lay on the department, which has not been produced. LEARNED counsel also could not point out any fact or circumstance which the Tribunal considered and which according to learned counsel was irrelevant. Nor could he point out any fact or circumstance which according to him was relevant and has not been considered by the Tribunal. In substance, therefore, the only contention advanced is that the facts considered by the Tribunal do not justify the inference that was drawn and it is because of this that this court by its order directed only this question to be referred to us.