1980 (4) TMI 74

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....-matter of that voluntary disclosure was kept with the wife of the assessee with the consent of his two brothers. The amount was kept lying with the said lady from the year 1951 up to the date of her death in May, 1956. After her death, the amount was deposited with the Central Bank of India in the names of two unmarried daughters of the assessee in equal shares, namely, Miss Sudarshan Kumari and Miss Satya Mehta. The deposits were made on 29th October, 1956, about four months after the death of the lady. The ITO asked the assessee to explain the sources of two deposits in the names of his two daughters and the assessee contended that the amount was out of the sum of Rs. 20,000 declared under the Voluntary Disclosure Scheme in October, 1951....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....i was 18 years of age at the time of partial partition of the HUF, whereas Satya Metha was 13 years old. The money was found deposited in the names of the two girls after five years of the partial partition and, therefore, it is obvious that both these daughters were major at the time when the money was found deposited in their names. The assessee took the plea that this amount represented a sum of Rs. 20,000 belonging to the HUF which was declared under the Voluntary Disclosure Scheme. It is not disputed that a sum of Rs. 20,000 was declared by the HUF of which the assessee was the karta under the disclosure scheme in October, 1951. It has also been found that this amount of Rs. 20,000 was not found mentioned in the books of accounts of th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....not by merely rejecting unreasonably a good explanation, convert good proof into no proof. " If the amount of Rs. 20,000 disclosed under the disclosure scheme had been found to be deposited or utilised by the assessee or the HUF in someother manner, in that case, a legitimate inference could be drawn that the amount in dispute was from undisclosed sources as the amount so disclosed in the disclosure scheme had been found to be otherwise utilised by the assessee or by the HUF but the finding on this aspect of the case is otherwise. The above observations of their Lordships of the Supreme Court go to support the view taken by us in this case. The matter can be looked from another angle also. The amount of Rs. 10,000 each was found in th....