9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 846X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he premises of assessee was undertaken under Section 133-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Return was filed by the assessee declaring the income of Rs.83,157/- on 21.3.2002. The case was taken up for scrutiny and the assessing authority concluded the assessment under Section 143(3) and a total income of Rs.9,64,940/- was found. Subsequently on rectification being undertaken under Section 154 on 14.2.2005 the correct income was determined at Rs.15,88,504/-. However, during the course of assessment under Section 143(3) the assessing authority found that the declaration of stock done by the assessee was not tallying with the physical survey done a difference of Rs.9,00,000/- was found unaccounted with regard to excess of stock. Similarly, conceal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er Section260-A of the I.T. Act. Shri Sanjay Lal, learned counsel for the petitioner took us through the orders passed by the appellate authority and the appellate tribunal, the reasons given by the authorities and tried to emphasize that for the purpose of imposing the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) mens rea is not an essential ingredient and once concealment of income is established no discretion is available to the competent authority to interfere with the penalty imposed or to modify it. It is stated that in perverse manner the interference is made by the appellate authority and the tribunal and, therefore, the appeal be admitted on the questions formulated in the memorandum. We have heard learned counsel for the Revenue at length, i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... seems to be reasonable and as the exoneration from payment of penalty for concealment on account of excess stock is found to be not a concealment in accordance to the authorities concerned we see no reason to interfere into the matter in this proceeding. The concurrent findings recorded by the appellate authority and the appellate tribunal is based on due appreciation of the totality of facts and circumstances and the discretion exercised in the matter cannot be termed as perverse or erroneous to such an extent that a substantial question of law rises, which warrants consideration by this Court. The question of mens rea and interference with the penalty imposed would arise only if concealment deliberate in nature is found to be established. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
