9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (2) TMI 763X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ANT GUPTA, J.(Oral) The present reference has been filed by the assessee under Section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961(for short, "the Act") pertaining to the assessment years 1985-86, 1986-87 and 1987-88, raising following substantial question of law: "Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... :- Ass.Years Original returns(Rs.) Income as per revised returns(Rs.) Income assessed (Rs.) Difference of Income (Rs.) 1985-86 24,916/- 2,18,763/- 2,88,763/- 70,000/- 1986-87 33,040/- 2,24,883/- 2,50,888/- 26,000/- 1987-88 6,890/- 1,38,988/- 1,98,988/- 60,000/- Thus there was difference of Rs. 70,000/- Rs. 26,000/- and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ning penalty for the years in question. Learned counsel for the assessee has argued that the income assessed is primarily on the basis of household expenses which have been found untenable by the Tribunal in respect of three other assessment years. Therefore, the income assessed is based upon estimated household expenses which will not attract penalty. On the other hand, Ms. Urvash ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eration for three assessment years, we find that such reason cannot be the basis of setting aside the penalty in the three subsequent years i.e. 1985-86, 1986-87 and 1987-88, as the Tribunal itself has treated the years in question differently. The Tribunal has considered the revised income on the basis of unexplained deficiencies in the shape of Fixed Deposits(FDs), deficiency in stock, expenses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
