9911796707
TMI Blog1984 (4) TMI 29X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tribunal, Patna Bench " A Patna. The following question has been referred for our opinion: " Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in holding that in calculating the penalty, the law which was in force on the first day of the assessment year, was to be applied and not the law which had come into force on April 1, 1968 The assessment year in questi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s levied. The assessee went before the Tribunal and the Tribunal, on considering the facts of the case, held that the assessee had not been able to discharge the onus which lay upon him under the Explanation to s. 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as " the Act"). The Tribunal further held that there was no basis for the estimate of returned income and in the opinion of the T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... into force on April 1, 1968, was not applicable to the facts of the instant case and he relied upon the case of Addl. CIT v. P.N. Prasad (Tax Case No. 63 of 1974, disposed of on April 16, 1984-[1984] 150 ITR 274). It is well settled that the penalty is to be imposed on account of the commission of wrongful act and the law operating on the day on which the wrongful act is committed which determines ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... submission that the Tribunal had taken a correct view of the law. In my opinion, there is no force in the submission advanced by the learned counsel for the assessee. In view of the consistent view taken by this court on the basis of the aforesaid Supreme Court case in Brij Mohan v. CIT [1979] 120 ITR 1, the question referred to this court for opinion has to be answered in the negative and I hold ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
