AMAR KUMARI Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application under Section 256(2) of the I.T. Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as " the Act"), has been filed in this court by the assessee seeking a direction to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur, to state the case and refer the questions arising out of the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal dated November 30, 1976, to this court for its opinion.

(2.) THE case of the petitioner is that she is assessed to income-tax under the provisions of the Act as an individual. During the assessment year 1972-73, relating to the accounting year ending on October 19, 1971, the assessee purchased a plot of land, marked B-7A, having an area of 1,799.9 sq. yards in the city of Jaipur from M/s. Vinay Chand Pravin Chand for a sum of Rs. 45,000 by means of a sale deed dated June 5, 1971, which was duly registered on July 17, 1971. In the course of the assessment proceedings for the aforesaid assessment year 1972-73, the ITO, Central Circle-2, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as " the assessing authority "), informed the assessee that the fair market value of the said plot purchased by her has been held to be Rs. 81,000, at the rate of Rs. 45 per sq. yard, in the case of M/s. Vinay Chand Pravin Chand and thus it appears that the purchase price of the plot in question was understated in the sale deed by a sum of Rs. 36,000 and the same represents the investment of the assessee in the purchase of the aforesaid property from outside income from undisclosed sources. THE assessee, thereupon, wrote back to the assessing authority on March 18, 1975, that the sale price stated by the assessee was duly supported by the registered document executed in respect of the same and the question of estimating its fair market value did not arise and so there was no question of any concealment of income. THE assessing authority, in the assessment order passed by him on March 22, 1975, held that the assessee invested Rs. 81,000 in the purchase of the plot of land in question and as the investment of only Rs. 45,000 was disclosed in the sale deed, a sum of Rs 36,000 invested by the assessee out of books in the purchase of the aforesaid plot of land represented her income from undisclosed sources, during the accounting year relevant to the assessment year 1972-73. In doing so, the assessing authority relied upon the order passed under Section 55A of the Act in the case of the vendor, M/s. Vinay Chand Pravin Chand. THE assessing authority also issued a notice to the assessee for showing cause why a penalty should not be imposed upon her under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act for concealment of the said income.

(3.) IN our view, the case involves matters relating to the proper interpretation of the provisions of Sections 52(2), 55A and 69B of the Act and as such the following two questions of law do arise out of the order of the INcome-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, dated November 30, 1976 :