9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Tribunal's justification in canceling the order under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act. 2. Tribunal's finding on whether the assessee concealed income or furnished inaccurate particulars. Analysis: - The case involved a reference under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, with two questions referred to the court. - The first question was whether the Tribunal was justified in canceling the order under section 271(1)(c) passed by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax. - The second question was about the Tribunal's finding on whether the assessee concealed income or furnished inaccurate particulars. - The assessee, a wholesale grocery firm, filed a return claiming deduction for composition fees paid to the Sales tax Department. - The Income-tax Officer estimated profits from suppressed sales and unaccounted capital, imposing a penalty under section 271(1)(c). - The Appellate Tribunal concluded that the assessee did not conceal income or furnish inaccurate particulars. - The Revenue requested the Tribunal to refer the questions, which were initially refused but later directed by the court. - The court analyzed whether the Tribunal's finding was based on considering the entire evidence and materials on record. - The court held that if the Tribunal's conclusion was without considering the evidence, it would be a question of law. - The court cited precedents to establish that it could only answer questions referred by the Tribunal. - After reviewing the judgment, the court found that the Tribunal had considered the entire matter in detail. - Consequently, the court answered question No. 2 in favor of the assessee and against the Revenue. - The judgment was to be transmitted to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, with no direction as to costs.
|
