Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

1988 (5) TMI 33

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....his deposit. It was stated that this amount had been disclosed by the said Smt. Ramrati Devi under the scheme of 1972 for helping small taxpayers. The Income-tax Officer did not accept the explanation. He found that Smt. Ramrati Devi was the wife of the karta of the assessee, which is a Hindu undivided family, and held that the said amount was really the income of the assessee from an undisclosed source. The amount was added back to the income and taxed accordingly. Being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner noted that the Patna Bench of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has held that Smt. Ramrati Devi should be assessed as a small taxp....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the scheme of the Act compels the Income-tax Officer to pass the assessment under section 143(i) even in the case of ladies and minors, the initial capital and other things being properly investigated and proved ? (iv) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in maintaining the deletion of the cash credit of Rs. 14,000 and not restoring the order of the Income-tax Officer ? " At the hearing, we have heard the respective submissions on behalf of the Revenue as also the assessee. It appears to us that questions Nos. (i), (ii) and (iii), though referred under section 256(2) of the Income-t....