9911796707
TMI Blog1988 (1) TMI 30X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ction being issued by this court on an application under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as " the Act "), referred the following question of law to this court for its opinion : " Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in deleting the penalty? " The facts in a nutshell necessary for answering the aforesaid question ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... den in the instant case to prove concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars thereof lay on the Department. It has been pointed out by him that in the instant case, only a sum of Rs. 3,300 was shown as total income by the assessee whereas the order of assessment was passed on a total income of Rs. 27,503 and it was found that the assessee had an additional income of Rs. 24,203 from ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the return for the aforesaid assessment year had been filed on March 19, 1969. In Brij Mohan v. CIT [1979] 120 ITR 1 (SC), the relevant assessment year was 1964-65. The return for the said year, however, was filed on April 24, 1968. In the meantime, section 271 of the Act was amended by the Finance Act, 1968, whereby clause (iii) was substituted . The case of the assessee was that since the releva ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt took place, would be relevant and applicable. We, therefore, find substance in the submission made by learned counsel for the applicant. The Tribunal shall consequently have to decide the appeal afresh in the light of the observations made above. In view of the aforesaid discussion, our answer to the question referred to us is that, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
