1959 (1) TMI 36

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....evious year taken into account was the year ending March 1947. During this year he ran 27 buses, 17 out of which were plying with Eluru as the headquarters and 10 from Narsapur. The assessee maintained separate accounts for each of these headquarters. But he returned a gross income of ₹ 56,458 for his entire business and after deducting a depreciation of ₹ 38,875 and certain inadmissible expenditure of ₹ 1000, declared a net income of ₹ 16,583. The Income Tax Officer rejected the results to be derived from the books of account and made an ad hoc addition of ₹ 80,000 to the gross income thus determining it at ₹ 1,36,458. After deducting ₹ 32,803 on account of depreciation, he determined the net incom....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ion of the assessee, one basis on which it could arrive at the gross income; but it appears to bus that even that basis has not been adopted. At any rate, the order of the Tribunal is so cryptic, vague and ambiguous that we are not able to ascertain that it has adopted the aforesaid basis. The Tribunal had before it the amount of fuel used in the running of the buses as found by the Officer and the admitted number of miles which each bus could run on that amount of fuel and, therefore, could compute the total mileage covered by these buses during the year. The Income Tax Officer had found that the petrol and charcoal purchased during the year was 17,300 gallons and 4,252 bags respectively. The assessee admitted that it would be possible to ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....erage rate of ₹ 5,000 per effective bus as against ₹ 1,36,458 adopted by the Officer and ₹ 96,000 adopted by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. The assessment should be re-worked on this basis." 4. In so far as the depreciation allowed and the initial depreciation was concerned, neither party has any objection to the Tribunals order. The passage cited above, in our view, indicates the reasons more for discarding the accounts than the basis in our view, indicates the reasons more for discarding the accounts than the basis for computing the gross income. We have ourselves tried to ascertain from the orders of the Income Tax Officer and the Appellate Assistant Commissioner whether there was any possible basis for the....