9911796707
TMI Blog1994 (1) TMI 125X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rounds of appeal in all these cases are as follows : "1. The learned CIT (Appeals) erred in cancelling the penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) holding that the same is unjustified as the applicability of provisions of section 271(1)(c) has not been established. The learned CIT (Appeals) ought to have appreciated that the Assessing Officer had recorded in the penalty order the fact that the additional income brought to tax would not have been admitted by the assessee but for the search seizure under section 132 of the Income-tax Act. 2. The learned CIT (Appeals) erred in holding that there is no concealment of income in view of the true and complete disclosure of income as provided under section 273A. The learned CIT (Appeals) faile ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r but subsequently it was withdrawn. The Assessing Officer was of the view that the disclosure was made only subsequent to the search and it was for the Commissioner of Income-tax to waive the penalty in view of the full disclosures made in the petition filed under section 273A of the Income-tax Act. But as no order was passed on the petition, he was bound to levy penalty as required under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act. Thus, penalty was levied for the following assessment years in the following sums: Assessment years Amount of penalty levied 1980-81 Rs. 47,033 1981-82 Rs. 10,790 1982-83 Rs. 41,700 1983-84 Rs. 46,030 1984-85 Rs. 32,710 1985-86 Rs. 77,490 The assessee appealed. The Commissioner (Appeals) after narra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tal of the income assessed for all these years did not exceed the income disclosed by the assessee in respect of the three years in the disclosure petition under section 273A of the Income-tax Act. Penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) were initiated in the course of the reassessment proceedings for and from assessment years 1980-81 to 1984-85. As the non-disclosure of full and true income had occurred in the returns filed by assessee leading to the original assessments, initiation of penalty proceedings in the course of reassessment proceedings in respect of the default found with the first returns filed by the assessee is proper and is upheld. In this view of the matter, we hold that the Commissioner (Appeals) erred in holding that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Income-tax Officer and the Commissioner of Income-tax are well defined and the tail cannot wag the head. On a perusal of the records, we are of the opinion that this is a fit case for the Commissioner to intervene under the powers given to him under section 273A of the Income-tax Act and it is for him to pass such orders as he may deem fit in accordance with law and in the interests of substantial justice, we do hope that he will not abdicate his responsibility. With these remarks, we allow the appeals of the revenue for the assessment years 1980-81 to 1984-85. However, for the assessment year 1985-86, the assessee had filed the return after the search. But before the revenue could detect any concealment, the assessee had suo motu filed its ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
