2004 (11) TMI 69

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... to section 271(1)(c) of the Act was applicable and, therefore, the inference that the applicant had concealed the particulars of his income has rightly been drawn. In this view of the matter, the Tribunal has not committed any illegality in upholding the imposition of penalty. - - - - - Dated:- 17-11-2004 - Judge(s) : R. K. AGRAWAL., PRAKASH KRISHNA. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... an addition of Rs. 12,000 to the gross profit returned in respect of the business carried on under the name and style of M/s. Jindal Textiles. The aforesaid addition has been reduced to Rs. 6,000 by the Tribunal vide order dated May 2, 1980. The Income-tax Officer initiated proceedings for imposition of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act in the course of the assessment proceeding itself. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... xplanation to section 271(1)(c) of the Act was applicable and, therefore, the inference that the applicant had concealed the particulars of his income has rightly been drawn. In this view of the matter, the Tribunal has not committed any illegality in upholding the imposition of penalty. In view of the foregoing discussion, we answer the question referred to us in the affirmative, i.e., in favou .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X