TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2006 (9) TMI 89
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Court in Income Tax Application No.56 of 1995 which was finally disposed of by Division Bench of this Court on October 10, 1995. The Court held that in the facts and circumstances of the case, question of law does arise, in the opinion of this Court. The application filed under section 256(2) was allowed with a direction to the Tribunal to refer the question proposed by the High Court. The Tribunal accordingly, has made the Reference on the question proposed by the High Court. The question reads as - "Whether in the facts and circumstances the case, when the explanation offered by directors and relatives of the assessee's company about the nature and source of acquisition of gold ornaments and jewellary admitted by such directors/relative....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to this Court, and this Court, under Section 256 (2) issued directions to the Tribunal to refer the question to this Court. Learned counsel for the assessee submits that from the very frame of the question, it would clearly appear that the explanation offered by the directors and relatives of the assessee company were to be accepted and under the circumstances, section 69A would not apply. 4. The learned counsel for the assessee also took us to the order passed by this Court in Income Tax Application No.56/95 and submitted that the Court recorded its opinion that, in a given case, application of 69A of the Act in itself would be a question of law. He submits that if interpretation of section 69A can be applied to the facts of this case, th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ce of acquisition of the money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article, or the explanation offered by him is not, in the opinion of the Assessing Officer, satisfactory, the money and the value of the bullion, jewellery or other valuable article may be deemed to be the income of the assessee for such financial year." 6. A bare reading and understanding of section 69A makes it clear that where the property described under section 69A is not recorded in the books of accounts, if any, maintained by the assessee from any source of income and the assessee does not offer any explanation about the nature and source of acquisition of such property, and the explanation offered is not satisfactory in the opinion of the Assessing Officer, then, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....a finding in relation to acceptance of the facts and thereafter proceeds to decide, then, the question of presumption or the inference to be drawn on the strength of the facts would be a question of law. In a given case, if the circumstances show that the one and only one inference could be drawn by the authority/officer/Court but the said officer/authority/Court draws an inference which is not permisible under the law, then such findings would be perverse and the appellate/revisional Court would be entitled to set aside the said findings and record its own findings. But in a case where the findings recorded by the Tribunal cannot be shown to be perverse nor can it be argued and proved that the said findings are perverse then, the said find....