9911796707
TMI Blog1964 (1) TMI 53X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... see did not bring into account the value of the closing stock of the coal extracted. The same method was repeated in the accounting year 1945. The Income-tax Officer estimated the closing stock for the first accounting year at ₹ 5,655 and for the second accounting year at ₹ 10,645. After estimating the closing stock the assessment was completed for these two accounting years. Thereafter, penalty proceedings under section 28(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act were commenced by the Income-tax Officer. It was contended on behalf of the assessee that there was no deliberate concealment or mis-statement of facts, but the Income-tax Officer rejected this contention and held that there was deliberate omission on the part of the assessee to di ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he meaning of that section. When the reference came to us for hearing in the first instance we considered that the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal should come to a definite finding as to the method of accounting followed by the assessee for the two accounting years after taking necessary evidence on the point. The case was accordingly referred back to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal under section 66(4) of the Indian Income-tax Act. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has now submitted a supplementary statement of the case and the finding of the Tribunal is that the assessee's system of accounting was neither cash nor mercantile but a hybrid system of both, from which the assessee's true profits could not have been ascertained. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Income-tax Act is a penal proceeding and the onus lies upon the income-tax department in such a proceeding to show that the assessee is guilty of concealment of the particulars of his income or deliberate furnishing of inaccurate particulars of such income. This view has been expressed by the House of Lords in Fattorini (Thomas) (Lancashire) Ltd. v. Inland Revenue Commissioner [1943] 11 I.T.R. (Suppl.) 50. It was pointed out by Lord Wright at page 65 of the report that the onus in such a proceeding was not of an ambulatory or shifting character, but the onus was finally upon the Crown to prove its right to impose what was a severe penalty. The same view has been expressed in a recent decision of this High Court in Khemraj Chagganlal v. Com ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
