9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (2) TMI 90X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sons assigned by the Assessing Officer to hold that the assessee had concealed the income are genuine and accordingly, confirmed the penalty. - Tribunal was justified in confirming the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer. - - - - - Dated:- 21-2-2006 - Judge(s) : P. D. DINAKARAN., P. P. S. JANARTHANA RAJA. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by P.D. Dinakaran J.- The above tax case appeals are directed against the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal dated November 25, 2004 made in I.T.A. Nos. 1285, 1286, 1287 and 1289/Mds/1997 and the following substantial questions of law have been raised for consideration. T.C. Nos. 916 to 918 of 2005: "1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, when a non- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the assessee had consciously concealed his income or had deliberately furnished inaccurate particulars, penalty could be imposed?" The assessment years with which we are concerned are 1984-85, 1985-86, 1986-87 and 1988-89. The facts which are relevant for the purpose of disposal of the tax case appeals are as under: The assessee M.S. Mohamed Marzook, who died on November 2, 2001, got repatriated from Sri Lanka in the year 1975. He married the daughter of a businessman in Sri Lanka, by name, T.O.M. Mustafa. The said Mustafa came to India in 1979 and died in the year 1982. The assessee later received some of his father-in-law's outstandings in Sri Lanka for which he could not adduce proof. In the previous years relevant to the assessm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ccurate particulars; and (ii) whether the assessee has acted bona fide and honestly filed the revised returns with a view to purchase peace. It is relevant to mention that in similar circumstances, this court by judgment dated February 1, 2006, in T.C. No. 112 of 2000, etc. batch (M. Sajjanraj Nahar v. CIT [2006] 283 ITR 230) has elaborately considered the above points, in the light of the decisions of the Supreme Court as well as various High Courts and held that if the assessee, at the time of submitting the original return intended to conceal a part of his income or deliberately gave false particulars at that time, the mere fact that he subsequently rectified the omission by giving the full particulars would not avoid the applicabili ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r gave false particulars. That obviously is a question of fact. In the decision of the question certain tests are applied to find whether the suppression, etc., was deliberate. Where for example the original return is incorrect, but the assessee voluntarily submits the correct return before the assessment, the Tribunal would be justified in coming to the conclusion that there was no concealment. This would be so even if the assessee put forward a false case after giving voluntarily the particulars. But where the disclosure was under circumstances which make it not a voluntary act of the assessee, there would be a justification for the finding that there was a concealment because there was an intention to conceal and actual concealment at th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d under the Explanation to section 271(1)(c) of the Act to enable the assessee to submit his explanation in this regard. That apart, in T.C. No. 112 of 2000, etc. batch, cited supra, this court held that the acceptance of the revised order (return?) itself cannot be a bar for initiating penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act against the assessee for concealment of income. In the same judgment, this court, citing the judgment of this court in CIT v. Ananthan Chettiar [2005] 273 ITR 401, held that when the assessee had offered no explanation except to assert that he disclosed the income only to buy peace with the Department and what was disclosed was additional income, the penalty should be levied with reference to the conce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
