1995 (10) TMI 42

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... was no concealment of wealth on the part of the assessee ? " The facts lie in a narrow compass. The assessees are the partners of the firm bearing the name and style of Kalekhan Mohd. Hanif, Bhopal. At the time of wealth-tax assessment for 1977-78, the Assessing Officer observed that there was a provision of huge amount in respect of the liabilities under various heads in the account of the firm. He, therefore, made an addition to the extent of the assessee's share in respect of liabilities in the case of the firm. The Wealth-tax Officer also ordered levy of penalty under section 18(1)(c) of the Act. This was cancelled by the Commissioner of Wealth-tax (Appeals). The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal dismissed the appeals of the Departme....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ncluded that there was concealment of wealth. The Tribunal, on appreciation of evidence on record, reached the conclusion that it could not be treated as concealment of wealth. Whether wealth is concealed or not is primarily a question of fact. The Tribunal evaluated the evidence placed on record and concluded that there was no concealment of wealth. This finding is not shown to be perverse or erroneous. In CIT v. Ashoka Marketing Ltd. [1976] 103 ITR 543 (SC) and in CIT v. Kotrika Venkataswamy and Sons [1971] 79 ITR 499 (SC), it is held that when the Tribunal reached the conclusion that there was no case of concealment, then such a finding is one of fact and did not give rise to any question of law to be referred and answered. We have....