9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Cross appeals by the assessee and the revenue for assessment year 1999-2000, and appeals by the assessee for the assessment years 1998-99 and 2000-01, regarding penalty under section 271(1)(c).
For the appeal in ITA Nos. 3210/M/07 and 3638/M/07 for assessment year 1999-2000: The case involved a Co-operative Housing Society facing penalty under section 271(1)(c) for additions made by the Assessing Officer. The key issue was whether the penalty provision applied to the facts of the case, specifically focusing on the phrases "concealed the particulars of income" and "furnished inaccurate particulars of income." The judgment emphasized that the duty of the assessee is to make a correct and complete disclosure of income, and any failure to do so attracts penal consequences under the Act. The Explanation 1 of section 271(1) was discussed, highlighting that the burden of proof lies on the assessee to establish a bona fide explanation. The Explanation was deemed to be a rule of evidence, with the initial burden of rebuttal on the assessee. The judgment concluded that in this case, the penalty under section 271(1)(c) was not justified as the assessee had disclosed all relevant material for income computation, and the explanation provided was not found false by the Assessing Officer. Therefore, the penalty was cancelled. For the appeal in ITA Nos. 6395/M/08 and 6396/M/08 for assessment years 1998-99 and 2000-01: These appeals raised the same issue of penalty under section 271(1)(c) based on identical facts as the previous case. Following the discussion and decision in the earlier appeal, the penalty under section 271(1)(c) was deemed not leviable and was consequently cancelled. As a result, the appeals of the assessee were allowed, and the appeal of the revenue was dismissed.
|
