COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. DEO NARAYANLAL JAGDISHLAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These are applications under Sec. 256(2) of the Income Tax Act of 1961 (hereinafter called "the Act") on behalf of the revenue. The relevant assessment years are 1963 -64 and 1964 -65.

(2.) The assessee is engaged in the business of hardware and paints. For defects found in the books of accounts the Income Tax Officer rejected the returns of both the years and made assessments to the best of his judgment. In the assessment year 1963 -64, he found cash credits to the tune of Rs. 1,20,000. Having come to hold that the assessee had failed to establish the cash credits, he took the peak amount of Rs. 70,000 as income of the assessee from undisclosed sources. In the second year, under similar circumstances, he added a sum of Rs. 20,000 to the profits of the assessee from undisclosed sources. The appellate authority upheld these additions. Upon further appeal by the assessee, the Appellate Tribunal dealing with the matter said:

(3.) The conclusion of the Appellate Tribunal in this case seems to have been reached on a consideration of the totality of the evidence placed on the record. Undoubtedly, it was open to the Appellate Tribunal to form an opinion that the explanation offered by the assessee was satisfactory in regard to the nature and source of the cash credits and as we are of the view that the Tribunal has, on an assessment of the entire material formed its opinion in the matter, the finding is one of fact and there is no question of law arising out of the appellate decision. In the circumstances, both the applications must stand rejected. There shall be no order as to costs.