9911796707
TMI Blog1985 (7) TMI 64X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 500, out of which a sum of Rs. 7,500 was allowed as expenditure. However, the Income-tax Officer also found that the assessee had introduced certain cash credits amounting to Rs. 2,62,688 in the form of telegraphic transfers, for which the assessee could not give any satisfactory explanation. The Income-tax Officer found that the assessee could not relate these T.Ts. to the sale proceeds of the goods and, therefore, after considering the earlier years remittances and the material present on record, he estimated that the maximum amount of Rs. 1,80,000 alone could be accepted as remittances made out of the sales. Consequently, the Income-tax Officer added the remaining amount of Rs. 82,688 to the assessee's total income as income from undiscl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tribunal was right in law in sustaining the penalty under section 271(1)(c) ? " As regards the question referred for the decision in Misc. Civil Case No. 164 of 1982, the learned counsel for the assessee contended that the sole basis for sustaining the addition of Rs. 25,000 indicated at the end of para. 9 of the Tribunal's order (annexure-C) dated August 13, 1976, was an addition made for the subsequent assessment years, but the same having been subsequently deleted, there is no basis for making this addition. We are unable to accept this contention. Reading para. 9 of the Tribunal's order as a whole, it appears that this was the reason given by the Tribunal for reducing the addition from the figure of Rs. 50,000 to Rs. 25,000, or, in o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the burden was on the assessee to rebut the presumption arising by virtue of the Explanation. The Tribunal has clearly held that no plausible explanation was given by the assessee in spite of sufficient opportunity given to the assessee for this purpose, with the result that the presumption arising by virtue of the Explanation has been unrebutted. This conclusion of the Tribunal, apart from being one of fact, is also borne out from the reasons given in support thereof. There is thus no basis to hold in favour of the assessee even in respect of the penalty matter. Consequently, both the questions are answered in favour of the Department and against the assessee as under: Misc. Civil Case No. 164 of 1982 Answer : On the facts and in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
