SHARMISHTHA SINHA Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE assessee has preferred this appeal under the provisions of Section 260A of the Income -tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), challenging the order dated November 7, 2001, passed by the Income -tax Appellate Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna, in I. T. (SS) A. No. 106/(Pat)/1997, for the block period 1986 -87 to 1996 -97, affirming the order dated November 28, 1997, passed by the learned Assistant Commissioner of Income -tax, Patna, being the assessing authority.

(2.) A brief statement of facts essential for the disposal of the appeal may be indicated. The appellant claims to be an employee in the Department of Prisons of the undivided State of Bihar. Her husband, Dr. Shashi Kumar Singh, was an employee in the Department of Animal Husbandry, of the undivided State of Bihar. In or around 1995 or 1996, a major scam in the Department of Animal Husbandry was busted showing involvement of a large number of Government servants. One Dr. Shyam Bihari Sinha, a resident of Ranchi and senior functionary of the Department of Animal Husbandry, was the king -pin of the scam. Persons like Dr. Shashi Kumar Singh as well as the present appellant were also integral part of the conspiracy in the scam and were henchmen of leading conspirators like Dr. Shyam Bihari Sinha and others, and made hay while the sun was shining. The matter at the stage of investigation was being monitored by a Division Bench of this Court on the criminal side as well as on the taxation side. A large number of employees of the State Government were, during the course of investigation, found involved in a scam of gigantic proportions. In such a situation, it was suspected that such Government employees like the present appellant and her husband had also disproportionate assets in their hands.

(3.) THEREAFTER as per the prescribed procedure notice was served on the appellant, as well as her husband, who was being separately proceeded against, the authorities took steps for valuation of the house. The said house in Buxi Compound, Bariatu, Ranchi, was perhaps in the appellant's name. Copies of the valuation report and other relevant documents were supplied to the appellant. She did not initially appear and refused to cooperate in the assessment proceeding. After considerable difficulties, the appellant's husband along with a lawyer appeared before the learned assessing authority. On a consideration of the materials on record, the learned Assessing Officer enhanced the valuation of the property, and also held that a Bank account at Ranchi had not been disclosed, and further found that journey expenses to Australia to attend to Dr. Shyam Bihari Sinha was not accounted for and were added to the undisclosed income. Consequently, the three items constituted undisclosed income and were assessed together as per the prescribed procedure. The learned Assessing Officer has also noted that the authorities under the Act had prohibited the appellant from operating a particular bank account notwithstanding which it was operated on two occasions which was also added up to the undisclosed income and were taxed in accordance with law. The appellant challenged the order dated November 28, 1997, passed by the learned Assistant Commissioner of Income -tax, by preferring appeal before the Income -tax Appellate Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna, and was registered as I. T. (SS) A. No. 106/(Pat)/1997 for the block period 1986 -87 to 1996 -97. The learned Tribunal allowed the appeal in part, but dismissed it substantially by order dated November 7, 2001 and impugned herein.