9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (9) TMI 619X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the income shown in the Income Tax returns and hence the larger period was invoked - Held that: - Revenue has proceeded against the appellants on the basis of the Income Tax returns. The fact of the details has been disclosed in the Income Tax returns which indicates that there was no suppression of facts - Prima facie, the appellants have strong case to succeed on time bar - appeal allowed - dec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nvoked. The appellant's contention is that the Income Tax returns were public documents and they have not suppressed the facts. The appellants relying on the following Apex Court judgments and the Tribunal judgment pleaded that they were in a bona fide belief that the declaration in the Income Tax returns itself is a fact of disclosure:- (i) Tamilnadu Housing Board vs. CCE, 1994 (4) RLT 526 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ily paid an amount of ₹ 8,63,308/- towards the differential tax for the period from April 2005 to March 2006. 3. The learned DR took me through the findings of the Commissioner who has not accepted the plea. On a specific query from the Bench as to whether the Commissioner has given any finding on the Apex Court judgments, the learned DR answered in the negative. 4. On a careful considerat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
