TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1989 (9) TMI 71
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... law in adding the sum of Rs. 25,000 as difference in the peak hundis and Rs. 10,584 for interest paid to 16 bankers, whose names and addresses were furnished at the time of the original assessment ?" The assessee is a, registered firm. The assessment year involved is 1955-56 for which the previous year ended on October 26, 1954. The return of income was filed on August 23, 1955. During the original assessment proceedings, the assessee had filed certain statements including the addresses of 16 hundi bankers to whom interest over Rs. 400 had been paid during that year. Certain other information, though called for, was not furnished by the assessee. The assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, without maki....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ment observing that the assessee had not been able to establish the genuineness of the hundi loans. The difference between the peak of hundi loans during the previous year and the peak of hundi loans on the first day of the previous year amounting to Rs. 25,000, Was therefore, added as the assessee's income from undisclosed sources. He also disallowed the interest paid on such hundi loans. The assessee's appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner as well as the Tribunal failed. That is how the Tribunal, at the instance of the assessee, has referred to this court the abovesaid two questions of law. The Tribunal considered the issue in the following manner "The Income-tax Officer issued the notice under section 148 of the Act of 19....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ase. Admittedly, the assessee had, in the course of the reassessment proceedings on three occasions, taken time from the Income-tax Officer, for supplying the details of the hundi loans, which included the names of the hundi brokers. The said information was not supplied may be that the matter was at that stage over 10 years old. It is not disputed that two of the erstwhile partners of the assessee-firm are alive. It is not shown that any attempt was made to contact them for obtaining the addresses of all the hundi brokers. Nor is it shown that the books of account of the assessee did not disclose the addresses of the said bankers. The position being as it is, the Income -tax Officer was justified in doubting the genuineness of the hundi bo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....'s income from assessment. In the instant case, the information in the possession of the Income-tax Officer is more vague than what it was in the Supreme Court case. Accordingly, it was argued by Shri Dalvi that if the reopening of the assessment under section 147(a) was held invalid in the Supreme Court case, it must necessarily be so in the present case. Dr. Balasubramanian, learned counsel for the Department, on the other hand, fairly admitted that the assessee had given a list of creditors to whom interest of Rs. 400 or more was paid during the original assessment proceedings. Since the assessee had not furnished the list of outstanding hundi loans, the Income-tax Officer, according to Dr. Balasubramanian, could not have examined all....