9911796707
TMI Blog1980 (8) TMI 3X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ase ? " The Commissioner of Income-tax had sought for referring three questions. But, the Tribunal referred only one question. Subsequently, the Commissioner moved this court in C. P. No. 18 of 1976 for, directing further questions to be referred to this court. An order was made by this court dated December 1, 1976, in C. P. No. 18 of 1976 and, pursuant to that order, the following question has also been referred for the opinion of this court : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in cancelling the penalty of Rs. 5 lakhs levied under section 271 (1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?" As both the references arise out of the same order of the Tribunal, they are disposed of by this comm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nsaction. In view of the addition made, the Income-tax Officer was of the opinion that the assessee had concealed its income or furnished inaccurate particulars thereof and, therefore, initiated proceedings for imposition of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. On the ground that the minimum penalty imposable would exceed Rs. 1,000, he referred the matter to the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner. He, after affording an opportunity to the assessee to show cause why penalty should not be imposed, did not accept the contention of the assessee that the amount did not represent any income and that, therefore, there was no question of concealing any income or furnishing inaccurate particulars thereof, and imposed penalty in a sum of Rs. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ant Member relating to the penalty matter, as follows:- "In other words, there is no positive material in the findings of either of the two members who passed the order in the appeal against the assessment that the impugned amount has been proved to be the income of the assessee. On the other hand, it has been held to be income because the assessee had not been able to prove that the amount really represented a loan. " It is, therefore, clear that the conclusion of the Tribunal that a case for imposition of penalty had not been made out and that, therefore, the penalty imposed was to be cancelled was correct and justified in the circumstances of the case. As stated earlier, in view of the conclusion reached by this court in regard to th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
