9911796707
TMI Blog1981 (11) TMI 87X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... explain past savings for a number of years and there was no implicit admission that he specifically earned as much income in this year as had been assessed?" 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld. Tribunal was right in law in holding that the onus that lay on the assessee was properly discharged?". 3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld. Tribunal was justified in cancelling the penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act?". Inasmuch as, in our opinion, no question of law arising out of the aforesaid order, we decline to raw up a statement of the case and refuse to refer any question of law to the High Court of judicature atAllahabad, as required u/s 256(1) of the IT Act. 1961. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Explanation were not attracted when the income of the assessee was enhanced merely by estimate. It was pleaded that the penalty proceedings should be dropped. The ITO, however, did not accept the assessee s explanation. He observed that certain papers signed by the Inspector at the time of the survey were not produced by the assessee for fear that if these papers were produced the correct income would be more than the income disclosed. He further, referred to the assessee s explanation regarding the purchase of a jeep on 21st May, 1974 for a sum of Rs. 32,000 during the course of 1975-76 assessment, wherein the assessee had stated that the jeep was purchased out of the savings of the past years which were worked out on the basis of the in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he income finally determined is, thus, more than the income returned and, therefore, the Explanation to s. 271(1) (c) is applicable to this case. The onus would, thus, lie on the assessee to establish that he is not guilty of any fraud or gross or wilful neglect in returning the correct income. For discharging the onus that lies on the assessee, he relied on his own income which is claimed to have been made faithfully, the Tribunal s order for the asst. yr. 1973-74 and the order of the AAC for asst. yr. 1975-76 wherein the income had been determined at only Rs. 12,000. during the asst. yr. 1975-76 the assessee filed a statement of assets and liabilities. His total assets as on31st March, 1974amounts to Rs. 62,350. No other material was on r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee had merely shown the income assessed for the asst. yrs. 1967-68 to 1974-75 amounting to Rs. 72,900 and had shown accumulated savings for different years of Rs. 47,900. By making this statement, the assessee does not admit that he earned an income of Rs. 20,000 for this year. That explanation was given to explain past savings for a number of years and there is no implicit admission of the assessee that he specifically earned as much income in this year as has been assessed. It is unnecessary to go into the cases cited by the parties because the question of levying penalty in any case would depend on the facts and circumstances of that case. On a consideration of the entirety of circumstances of this case, I am satisfied that on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
