9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (5) TMI 15X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... justified in holding that there was no difference in the figures of income returned originally, revised income and assessed income? - Whether, Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessee had successfully discharged the burden of proof which lay on it in terms of Explanation to section 271(1)(c)?" - The finding of the Tribunal that when the assessee has claimed some amount though that is debatable, in such cases, it cannot be said that the assessee has concealed any income or furnished inaccurate particulars for evasion of the tax. In view of the findings of the Tribunal, no case is made out for interference by this court. - In the result, we answer all the four questions in the affirmative, i.e., in favour of the assessee and agains ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Income-tax Act and a total income was assessed at Rs. 12,29,580. The assessee in the original return filed on June 30, 1988, declared total income of Rs. 10,09,950 but in the revised return filed on December 27, 1988, he declared total income at nil as there was addition on account of wrong claim of deduction under sections 80HH and 80-I. The penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) had been initiated and penalty of Rs. 8,60,000 was imposed by the Assessing Officer. The Commissioner of income-tax (Appeals) has also confirmed the penalty but reduced the penalty amount to Rs. 6,25,510. In appeal before the Tribunal, the Tribunal has cancelled the penalty so imposed, holding that the assessee has claimed the deductions on arguable ground ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ry were, therefore, not right. What is more, since the assessee had paid tax amounting to Rs. 6,90,000 a refund of Rs. 3,481 became payable to it as a result of the final assessment. There is another fact which also required to be noticed, namely, as against the deduction of Rs. 6,73,298, claimed by the assessee on the basis of the original return the total deduction allowed as a result of the final assessment was more, namely, Rs. 10,17,306. Therefore, in whatever manner the matter is looked at on the basis of the foregoing facts, it is not possible to uphold the levy of any penalty under section 271(1)(c) in this case and the assessee can be said to have successfully discharged the burden of proof, which lay on it in terms of the applicab ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
