1982 (11) TMI 11

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d September 12, 1975, in I.T.A No. 99 of 1974-75 for the assessment year 1970-71 and seeks to require the Tribunal to refer the same to this court for decision : "(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, considering that the assessee-firm had itself shown the sales tax liability of Rs. 19,131 for the quarter ending March 31, 1970, only, the Appellate Tribunal was justified .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he facts which, shorn of the details, can be stated thus The respondent, M/s. Suresh Kumar Naresh Kumar, withdrew on March 31, 1970, Rs. 29,735 from the cash book for the purposes of meeting the sales tax liability. The said amount was again brought back in the cash book on April 1, 1970, and was credited to the sales tax account relevant to the next assessment year, namely, the assessment year .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... as " the Act "), were initiated against the respondent-assessee, inter alia, regarding the concealment of the amount of Rs. 29,735. Since the Explanation to s. 271(1)(c) was applicable to the case, because the income returned was less than 80% of the income assessed after the AAC's order, the onus was on the assessee to establish that the failure to return the correct income did not arise from any .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he sales tax account did not amount to any mala fide action as the same was credited in the cash book on April 1, 1970, and was duly credited in the next year to the sales tax account. The Tribunal on the strength of the Supreme Court's view in Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 363, held that the assessee had discharged the onus because it did have a statutory liability to pay sale .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... cumstances of this case we are satisfied that the assessee is guilty of neither any concealment of income under section 271(1)(c) nor deemed concealment under the Explanation to s. 271(1)(c) " and did not misdirect itself in cancelling the penalty levied by the Revenue on the assessee-firm. In this view of the matter, we hold that no case is made out for directing the Tribunal to draw up a case .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X