9911796707
TMI Blog1993 (3) TMI 33X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the basis of law applicable on that date ? 2. Whether the Tribunal was justified in upholding the finding of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner in reducing the penalty from Rs. 7,118 to Rs. 1,000 ?" The brief facts of the case are that the assessment of the assessee was initially completed on the total income of Rs. 5,159 on August 28, 1967. Later on, it came to the notice of the assessing authority that the assessee is doing his business mainly in gold outside the books of account and accordingly proceedings under section 147 were initiated. This reassessment was completed on February 11, 1972, on the total income of Rs. 10,139. This order was set aside in appeal on August 21, 1978, and the final order was framed on November 30, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e maximum at Rs. 1,371 and so the penalty of Rs. 1,000 was sustained. Against the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, the Income-tax Officer preferred an appeal before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bombay Bench, 'A' Camp at Jaipur, who also came to the conclusion that the concealment, if any, was committed on the date when the original return was filed. The submission of standing counsel for the Department is that the law is applicable as on the date when the satisfaction of the Income-tax Officer is recorded and the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is not in accordance with law. We have considered the matter. The point in dispute is covered by the decision of this court given in the case of Chunnilal Mahajan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inaccurate particulars of such income, then he may direct that such person shall pay by way of penalty the amount specified in clause (iii) of that sub-section. The word "satisfaction" which has been used is for the purpose of initiating the penalty and assuming the jurisdiction and the offence is committed when the particulars are concealed or inaccurate particulars are furnished in respect of the income which could be by furnishing the return and, therefore, the offence is committed at the time when initially the return is submitted. In these circumstances, we are of the view that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal were justified in coming to the conclusion that the concealment in this case took ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
