Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

1. All these six taxation cases are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience and also because they are interconnected in view of the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal").

2. Let us first take up Taxation Cases Nos. 17 of 1972 and 44 of 1975, as both relate to the same assessee, Guru Prasad.

3. The facts of the case may be briefly stated. The assessee, Guru Prasad, encashed high denomination notes of the value of Rs. 2,98,000 on January 19, 1946, from the Imperial Bank, Gaya. During the assessment proceedings, the assessee was asked to disclose the nature and source of the high denomination notes. The Income-tax Officer did not accept the explanation furnished by the assessee and the sum of Rs. 2,98,000 representing the value of Rs. 298 high denomination notes was assessed as secreted business income of the assessee for the assessment year 1947-48. A copy of the assessment order has been annexed and marked as annexure "A" forming part of the statement of the case in Taxation Case No. 17 of 1972, which shows that the assessee was assessed in the status of an individual.

7. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner quoted the terms of the settlement and then came to a finding that as the amount of Rs. 2,98,000 of the assessee was clearly covered under the terms of the settlement referred to above, nothing was required to be done with regard to the proceeds of the encashment of high denomination notes to the tune of Rs. 4,69,000 including the amount of Rs. 2,98,000 of the assessee which was already assessed to tax in the assessment year 1947-48. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner held that it was not open to the assessee to agitate or reopen any issue which formed part of the settlement in view of Section 34(1B) of the 1922 Act. A copy of the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner has been annexed in Taxation Case No. 17 of 1972 and marked as annexure "B" forming part of the statement of the case.

14. In Taxation Case No. 17 of 1972, the Tribunal has referred the following question of law for the opinion of this court:

"Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the sum of Rs. 2,93,000 encashed by the assessee from high denomination notes from the Imperial Bank, Gaya, on January 19, 1946, can be assessed in the assessment year 1947-48?"

15. In view of the order of the. Tribunal dated November 30, 1970, (annexure C) aforesaid, the Income-tax Officer rectified the assessment order for the assessment year 1947-48 under Section 155(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the 1961 Act"). The Income-tax Officer has clearly pointed that where as a result of the excess profits tax and business profits tax payable by the assessee having been modified in appeal, it is necessary to amend the total income chargeable to income-tax. The Income-tax Officer has also mentioned that notice under Section 155 of the 1961 Act was issued to the assessee to state whether he has any objection to the proposed amendment of the total income. The notice was duly served and received. This shows that the assessee had no objection to the proposed amendment. Accordingly, he rectified his order relating to the assessment year 1947-48 by which business profits tax and excess profits tax payable was withdrawn and revised demand notice and challan were ordered to be issued. The rectification order of the Income-tax Officer has been annexed and marked as annexure "A" forming part of the statement of the case in Taxation Case No. 44 of 1975.

30. As regards Taxation Case No. 17 of 1972, it cannot be doubted that annexure "C" in Taxation Case No. 44 of 1975 clearly mentions that it was agreed that out of Rs. 86,03,349, a sum of Rs. 25,64,742 representing the amount already assessed or disallowed in the course of the original assessment, the balance that remained to be taxed is Rs. 60,38,607. The settlement related to the assessment years 1940-41 to 1947-48.

31. Assessment was made in Taxation Case No. 17 of 1972 for the assessment year 1947-48 against the assessee in the status of an individual relating to the amount of Rs. 2,98,000. The assessee appealed before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner in annexure "B" in Taxation Case No. 17 of 1972 has pointed out that the amount of Rs. 25,64,472 included the amount of Rs. 4,69,000 relating to the amount of encashment of high denomination notes assessed to tax in the assessment year 1947-48 and this amount of Rs. 4,69,000 included Rs. 2,98,000 relating to high denomination notes encashed by the assessee, Guru Prasad. In view of this fact, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner held that the amount of Rs. 2,98,000 assessed in the assessment year 1947-48 was covered by the settlement, annexure "C", in Taxation Case No. 44 of 1975 and so, in view of Section 34(1D), the assessee was not entitled to assert that the amount should be assessed in the assessment year 1946-47 and not in the assessment year 1947-48.