9911796707
TMI Blog1999 (9) TMI 20X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, has referred the following question of law for the opinion of this court : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessee was not liable to the imposition of penalty even though the Explanation to clause (c) of section 271(1) of the Income-tax Act was attr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under section 271(1)(c) and by an order dated September 6, 1975, levied a penalty of Rs. 11,438. The said penalty was cancelled by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner who found that no concealment on the part of the assessee was made out. According to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, no material had been brought on record to show that the amount invested in the reconstruction came out of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Income-tax Officer or the Appellate Assistant Commissioner or the Commissioner (Appeals) to be false, or (B) such person offers an explanation which he is not able to substantiate, then, the amount added or disallowed in computing the total income of such person as a result thereof shall, for the purposes of clause (c) of this sub-section, be deemed to represent the income in respect of whic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nary and, therefore, in the circumstances of the case, we do not find any illegality in the Tribunal's order. We, therefore, answer the aforesaid question in the manner that the question of the applicability of Explanation 1 to section 271(1) of the Act having not been agitated before the Tribunal, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessee was not liable for imposition of penalty. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
