COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. SHEO PRASAD SARJUG PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE material facts and the proceedings leading to this reference are, inter alia, that Messrs. Sheo Prasad Sarjug Prasad, the assessee, carries on business in haldi. It was assessed to income-tax for the assessment year 1974-75, the accounting period ending on October 24, 1973. During the assessment, a sum of Rs. 14,000 was found credited in the name of one Smt. Ramrati Devi. THE assessee was asked to explain the nature and source of this 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 Srnt. 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.

(2.) 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 taxpayer and as a separate assessee. He accepted the explanation of the assessee and deleted the addition.

(3.) IT was contended on behalf of the assessee that both the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the Tribunal having accepted the deposit in the name of Smt. Ramrati Devi as genuine and the same being a finding of fact and not challenged by the Revenue as perverse, question No. (iv) should be answered in favour of the assessee.