9911796707
TMI Blog1992 (8) TMI 69X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ulars of income within the meaning of section 271(1)(c) of the Act and consequently the levy of penalty under the said section was not justified? (2) Whether the disclosure of the prize money receipts in Part IV of the return of income could be considered as true and full disclosure within the meaning of section 271(1)(c) of the Act? (3) Whether the Tribunal was right in law in holding that, except for the falsity of the explanation of the assessee, it was not established by positive evidence by the Revenue that the impugned amount was income earned by the assessee during the year in appeal and, therefore, the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act cannot be sustained ? (4) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the conclusion that the assessee was guilty of concealment of income or filing inaccurate particulars of income. He imposed a penalty of Rs. 2 lakhs under section 271(1)(c) read with the Explanation thereto. The respondent-assessee challenged the order of penalty in appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal, having considered the rival submissions, found that the question regarding penalty was considered in I. T. A. No. 373/(Ahd.) of 1974-75, decided on October 18, 1975. The Tribunal found that the levy of penalty for concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income was not justified as disclosure in Part IV of the return was sufficient disclosure. The Tribunal, therefore, deleted the penalty imposed under section 271( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ard a similar contention to that put forward in the present proceedings, viz., that he had earned prize money which was shown as casual income in Part IV of his return. This court observed on such identical facts that such participation and winning of prize money in such participation was not a genuine competition. It may be noted that the facts in Suleman's case [1983] 139 ITR 8 (Guj) and the facts in the present case are by and large identical. In the present case also, the authorities have come to the conclusion that the assessee's version that he secured a prize in crossword competition was palpably false. Since the assessee admitted the fact that he had earned income during the said assessment year by showing the same in Part IV of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
