Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 4 of 4 (0.17 seconds)Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Madhya ... on 8 February, 1963
"6.4 I have carefully considered the order of the Assessing Officer
and the submission made by the appellant. I find that in respect of
the above mentioned addition the contention of the appellant is not
acceptable especially regarding the request for telescoping against the
income of the firm I find that this request of the appellant is not at all
tenable or acceptable as both the appellant and the firm in which he is
a partner are different taxable entities. The application of undisclosed
income as a source can only be set off against undisclosed asset or
investment in the hands of the same appellant. No set off can be
given in respect of undisclosed income declared by another appellant.
The Income Tax Act does not recognize the concept of group
assessments. Even for a moment if one considers the appellant's
request, it is seen from the observation made by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in the case of Kale Khan Mohd. Hanif vs. CIT 50 ITR 1 S.C that
the onus of proving the source of the asset found is on the appellant.
In this case, besides making a general statement no evidence had
been produced to link the said asset with the undisclosed income of
the firm. Besides, it is to be kept in mind here that out of Rs.93320
worth of jewellery shown in the hands of the Mrs. Urmila Singh, the
Assessing Officer has added only Rs.66,678/- worth as purchased
from undisclosed income as the appellant had categorically stated so
in his statement. Now the appellant is trying to take refuge referring
to the films undisclosed income and the return of income filed by his
wife and this cannot be accepted unless the appellant conclusively
proves his case that jewellery identified as undisclosed by the
Assessing Officer has a nexus with the income of the firm or with that
declared in the return of income of his wife. As such on this ground
also the appellant's contention fails. Therefore, the AO's order is
upheld and the ground of appeal dismissed."
Section 132 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
The Advocates Act, 1961
1