TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1980 (4) TMI 153
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s. 15,000 odd arose from the fact that salary income was admittedly taxable in individual's hands alone. Regarding the balance income the assessee's claim as per revised return dt.25th Dec., 1972was that it belonged to the HUF. The ITO negatived the said claim. 3. Original return dt.19th Dec., 1969showed income of Rs. 8,004,653 and was accompanied by, inter-alia, the following statement: "Statement of lease money received during the year ending on31st March, 1969": 1. Lease money South of Rambagh Palace Rs. 1,000 2. Lease of land outside Sawai Madhopur Viman Bhavan Rs. 711 3. Polo Club, Rajasthan Rs. 1 . Rs. 1,712 4. First item of "Income from Other Sources" appearing in computation in the original assessments read "Income from l....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... having disclosed, during the original assessment, the factum of lease under consideration as also the sale receipt of Rs. 1,000 as rent in that connection, there was no failure on assessee's part to disclose any fact material for assessment and there was no resultant escapement of any taxable income. 9. Revenue has come up in appeals against the said findings. Before proceeding further two chains of events are to be noticed. 10. In the reassessments on individual (sub-stantive) and HUF (Protective) Rs. 11,25,000 was taken under s. 52, IT Act as the deemed full value of the consideration received in respect of lease held interest which stood carved out in lessee's favour and in conclusion Rs. 5 lacs odd was added under the head Capital Ga....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... i.e. Capital Gains, that fact by itself cannot give rise to reasonable belief that any taxable income has escaped assessment. Next the question arises as to whether the provision of s. 52 IT Act make a difference to the said position. Our answer is "No". The reason is there are umpteen rulings of High Courts taking the view that in the absence of proof of receipt of any payment by the assessee under the table, those provisions cannot be invoked or pressed in aid at all. There is not even a whisper on Department's side to this day that in connection with the lease in question the assessee received anything under the table. That clearly leads to the conclusion that no income could be by any stretch of imagination reasonably believed to have ....