COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. BIJU PATNAIK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE references relate to the assessment years 1962-63, 1963-64 and 1964-65 in respect of the same assessee who is assessed as an individual. Against the assessments, the assessee preferred appeals and the Appellate Assistant Commissioner set aside the assessments in respect of the three years with a direction to reframe the same afresh after giving adequate opportunity to the appellant to cross-examine the witnesses in the light of the observations made in the appellate order. The assessee and the Revenue both preferred appeals before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal where it was held, amongst others, that statements obtained under Section 131 of the Income-tax Act cannot be used against the assessee without providing an opportunity to him to place materials for rebutting the same. It was further held that the Income-tax Officer failed to consider all the evidence on record and without calling upon the assessee to furnish explanation on some points, the Income-tax Officer formed a conclusion against the assessee unwarranted by the facts and circumstances of the case. With such findings, the Tribunal considered some materials ignoring some others and directed the Income-tax Officer to exclude all the investments, remittances, receipts, income from dividends, income from interest and other usufructs found in the name of Kalinga Foundation Trust from the assessments of the assessee in all these years. Against these appellate orders, the Revenue filed applications under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act for stating a case to this court. Being of the opinion that all the findings are inferences of fact, the Tribunal refused to refer the questions posed before it. Applications under Section 256(2) of the Act were also rejected by this court and the Revenue approached the Supreme Court against such rejection.

(2.) AFTER hearing the parties, the Supreme Court held that, on the principles enunciated by the Supreme Court in several decisions referred to in the judgment, eight questions arising out of those proposed by the Revenue are questions of law on the facts and circumstances of the case. The eight questions are as follows :