9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Penalty under section 271(1)(c) for concealed income. Analysis: 1. The appeal was against the penalty of Rs. 4,82,560 imposed under section 271(1)(c) for assessment year 1995-96. 2. The assessee, a company manufacturing oxygen gas, initially declared a loss of Rs. 10,49,036, which was reduced to nil by the Assessing Officer under section 144. 3. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) confirmed the penalty, citing the amendment in the law post-1976, making the earlier decision inapplicable. 4. The assessee contended that the surrender of Rs. 10,49,036 was voluntary, considering accumulated losses and no tax effect, thus no deliberate concealment was involved. 5. The Departmental Representative argued that penalty is justified post-amendment, referring to specific provisions and court decisions supporting penalty imposition. 6. The Tribunal noted that post-amendment, burden of proof shifted to the assessee, and the explanation provided by the assessee was crucial in determining penalty imposition. 7. Referring to Explanation 1 of section 271(1)(c), the Tribunal found that the assessee's explanation was not false, thus Explanation-1(A) was not applicable. 8. Considering Explanation-1(B), the Tribunal analyzed the circumstances, noting that the surrender was to buy peace, with no monetary loss to the assessee or gain to the revenue, leading to the conclusion that the explanation was bona fide. 9. Ultimately, the Tribunal held that the penalty under section 271(1)(c) was not justified in this case, and thus, deleted the penalty amount of Rs. 4,82,560. 10. Consequently, the appeal of the assessee was allowed. This detailed analysis of the legal judgment highlights the key arguments, court decisions, and the Tribunal's reasoning leading to the deletion of the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) in the case.
|
