9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Determination of income from other sources for assessment year 1970-71. 2. Assessment of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the IT Act, 1961. Detailed Analysis: 1. The appellant purchased a bus in June 1970 for Rs. 34,000, claiming the funds came from previous earnings as a transport contractor and agricultural income. The Income Tax Officer (ITO) rejected the explanation, assessing the total income at Rs. 39,500, including Rs. 34,000 as income from other sources for the assessment year 1970-71. On appeal, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner (AAC) reduced the additional income to Rs. 24,000, granting relief of Rs. 10,000. The appellant further appealed, reiterating the same contentions. The Tribunal concurred with the AAC's view, noting the lack of proof of the availability of funds at the time of purchase, especially considering the appellant's young age and absence of filed tax returns for earlier years. The Tribunal found no merit in the appeal and dismissed it. 2. The appellant filed a return for the first time, declaring Rs. 5,500 as income from bus transport business, having purchased a bus for Rs. 34,000. The ITO treated the entire Rs. 34,000 as income from undisclosed sources, which was reduced to Rs. 24,000 on appeal. In penalty proceedings, a penalty of Rs. 24,000 was imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the IT Act. The appellant contended that no case for penalty was established, citing an unreported judgment explaining the legal fiction created by the Explanation to section 271(1)(c). The Tribunal noted that the appellant's explanation regarding the source of investment was rejected but found no evidence of fraud or neglect. The department failed to prove the conditions for penalty under the Explanation. Consequently, the penalty was quashed, and the ITO was directed to refund any collected amount. The appeal on the penalty issue succeeded and was allowed.
|
