9911796707
TMI Blog1988 (4) TMI 31X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the years of assessment are 1971-72 and 1972-73. The question of law referred by the Tribunal under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short " the Act "), in all the three cases is as follows : " Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in holding that the penalty at the minimum is leviable with reference to the amended law ? Facts of S.J.C. No. 72 of 1981 : The assessee, Dr. S. Samantasinghar, besides his professional income was also deriving salary income from the State Government. He filed return on November 21, 1973, for the assessment year 1973-74, showing gross receipt of Rs. 49,900 from his profession and claiming Rs. 33,500 as expenditure. A part of the claim was allowed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rs. 30,516 during the financial year 1970-71 by way of consultation fees from the employees of the Central Government, the assessment for the period 1971-72 was reopened under section 147 read with section 148 of the Act. On similar information that during the assessment year 1972-73, the assessee had received a sum of Rs. 25,211 from the (Central Government) employees, the Income-tax Officer, while reopening the assessment, also initiated penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act for both the periods on February 26, 1975. The explanation of the assessee was rejected and for the assessment year 1971-72, the Income-tax Officer found concealment of Rs. 17,660 and for the next year Rs. 17,550. Accordingly, penalties were levied on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... " (iii) in the cases referred to in clause (c), in addition to any tax payable by him, a sum which shall not be less than twenty per cent. but which shall not exceed. one and a half times the amount of the tax, if any, which would have been avoided if the income as returned by such person had been accepted as the correct income." This was substituted by the Finance Act, 1968, with effect from April 1, 1968, by the following clause : "(iii) in the cases referred to in clause (c), in addition to any tax payable by him, a sum which shall not be less than, but which shall not exceed twice, the amount of the income in respect of which the particulars have been concealed or inaccurate particulars have been furnished. " Clause (iii) and the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e concealing his real income which is crucial and the law in force on that any a one should apply to such cases. As already stated, the question is not res integra and has fallen for consideration times without number before different High Courts. I may refer first to a decision of this court in the case of CIT v. K. C. Behera [1976] 105 ITR 193, which was relied upon on behalf of the assessees. In that case, for the accounting year ending on September 17, 1964, the return was filed subsequently. On April 1, 1964, the word " deliberately " in section 271(1)(c) had been deleted and an Explanation was added. In this background, the question raised on behalf of the assessee was that the Revenue had failed to establish that the assessee had c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ings for assessment of tax which were governed by the law prevailing during the assessment year. Article 20 of the Constitution also provides that no person will be subjected to a penalty greater than that which might have been inflicted under the law in force at the time of the commission of the offence. The above authorities are direct in point and the consensus of judicial opinion is against the contention of the assessee. Particularly, there is no divergence of judicial opinion on this point. In view of the direct decisions touching on the main question, it is not necessary to refer to some other decisions dealing with the cases falling under the other clauses of section 271. Strong reliance was, however, placed by learned counsel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
