1971 (2) TMI 16

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e assessee was able to explain the nature and source of a total sum of Rs. 51,500, but for the balance his explanation was not accepted by the Income-tax Officer. Subsequently, the assessee surrendered the balance of Rs. 61,915 for taxation in a revised return filed by it. when the Income-tax Officer took up the assessment proceedings again he found still further cash credits over and above those which he had already discovered. The total of the further cash credits now detected by him amounted to Rs. 9,250. The assessee attempted to explain the nature and source of these cash credits, but his explanation was found unsatisfactory and the Income-tax Officer added a further sum of Rs. 9,250 to the assessee's income. The assessee proceeded in .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... llate Assistant Commissioner for the purpose of levying the penalty, the entire penalty order was liable to be quashed. The Tribunal was of the view that it was not possible to treat the penalty order as severable. At the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax the Tribunal has now referred this case. An application was made on behalf of the assessee before this court under section 66(4) of the Act, and we have by our order of date dismissed that application. The only question before us, therefore, is whether having regard to the grounds upon which the Tribunal proceeded it was justified in law in cancelling the levy of penalty imposed by the Income-tax Officer. Section 28(1), so far as it is material, provides : " 28. (1) If t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... authority, and they must be proceedings necessarily under some provision of the Act other than section 28. In the instant case, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner found cash credits in the amount of Rs. 46,601 to represent income from undisclosed sources. If a penalty could be imposed in respect of that amount, it lay within the jurisdiction of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. The amounts were discovered in the course of the appellate proceeding before him. They were discovered by him. It was for him then to impose the penalty if he was satisfied that the assessee had concealed the particulars of his income or had deliberately furnished inaccurate particulars of it. The Income-tax Officer was seized of the assessment proceeding, and .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X