1989 (1) TMI 81

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the assessee's case for the assessment year 1973-74 ? (2) Whether the finding of the Tribunal that the assessee had not deliberately furnished any inaccurate particulars of wealth is based on relevant materials and is a reasonable view to be taken on the facts of the case ?" The assessee is an individual and in relation to the valuation date March 31, 1973, relevant for the assessment year 1973-74, she filed return on June 22, 1973, admitting a net wealth of Rs. 97,345. This included two items of immovable property, viz., a house bearing door No. 3, Bharathi Nagar First Street, T. Nagar, Madras, valued at Rs. 40,000 and door No. 22, Anderson Street, Madras, valued at Rs. 1,00,000. We are not concerned in this reference with the latter....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....only a monthly rental of Rs. 250 even at the time of sale and, therefore, there was no concealment and the penalty proceedings should be dropped. The Inspecting Assistant Commissioner was of the view that the provisions of section 18(1)(c) of the Act stood attracted as the assessee had not admitted the correct market value of the property on March 31, 1973, and that the valuation report of 1968 could not be relied upon as there had been a steep rise in the value of properties in that area and the rental yield would not be relevant. Considering the entering into of the agreement for sale of the property by the assessee in October, 1973, and the value set out therein and the receipt of an advance of Rs. 20,001 by the assessee and the omission....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....in this connection was also made to the views expressed by Sri A. C. Sampath Iyengar in Three New Taxes, Sixth Edition, Volume 1, at page 749. We have carefully considered the rival submissions. We are of the view that it is unnecessary, on the facts and circumstances of this case, to consider and decide the question whether inaccuracy in the value declared would amount to concealment of particulars or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of an asset. It is seen that the property in question was a single storeyed house in an area of 4,574 sq. ft. and had been purchased by the assessee from the Bharathi Nagar Co-operative House Construction Society for a sum of Rs. 22,365 under a document dated June 10, 1971. The property was valued in 19....