1977 (10) TMI 76

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... four assessment years, the ITO levied penalties under s. 271(1)(c) of the IT Act for concealment of income. The penalties levied were Rs. 14,000, Rs. 7,050, Rs. 9,800 and Rs. 10,330 respectively for these years. It is not necessary for me to go into the merits of the case because it is admitted before me that on merits it could be said that the assessee had not disclosed the true income. The incom .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... April, 1968 the ITO applied the amended provisions of s. 271(1)(c) and levied the above penalties, which were equal to the income concealed. 2. The point new raised before me is that when there returns were filed the law relating to penalty was different. The law applicable on the date when the returns were filed must be applied for the levy of penalty because the offence was committed on the d .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... retrospectively applicable. There is nothing in the Act to inter such a retrospective application. I think therefore, the penalties imposed under the amended law in incorrect and they should be set aside. At this stage an argument has been raised that since the proceedings were taken under s. 148 and the returns were filed in response to these proceedings, the law applicable on the date when the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X