Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: AVDHESH KUMAR JAIN VS Respondent: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX
Court Name: Allahabad High Court Judge(s): R. K. Gulati, R. M. Sahai Title: AVDHESH KUMAR JAIN vs COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX Case No.: Income-tax Application No. 220 of 1988, Date of Judgment:1989-02-27 Reported As: 1990 PTD 652 Result: Application rejected
JUDGMENT
JUDGMENT This application under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act relates to the assessment year 1978- 79. Basically, two questions have been raised in this application. The first question is whether a sum of Rs. 28,000 which was assessed as income from undisclosed sources was liable to be so assessed. According to the assessee, he had earned that amount from agriculture and it was thus exempt from the tax under the Income-tax Act. The concurrent findings of the tax authorities including the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal are that the assessee had failed to produce any satisfactory evidence about his being engaged in agricultural activities. The further finding is that the assessee was also not able to state to whom the said agricultural produce was sold. Consequent to the aforesaid finding, the Tribunal has held that the sum of Rs. 28,000 was rightly assessed as income from undisclosed sources in the, hands of the assessee. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that the findings recorded by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal are pure findings of fact which are based on appreciation of evidence. The view taken by the Tribunal is a possible view on the evidence that was placed before it. In our opinion, the order of the Tribunal does not give rise to any question of law on the findings recorded by it. Coming to the second question, the only controversy raised is whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in taking the view that 50% of the income from the sale of potatoes stored in the cold storage by the assessee was exempt as income from agriculture. The findings recorded by the Tribunal in that regard also are concluded by the findings of fact and in our opinion do not give rise to any question of law. This application is without any merit and is accordingly rejected.