1982 (4) TMI 8

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ction of this court, are as follows : " (1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that there was no gross or wilful neglect on the part of the assessee and that the Explanation to s. 271(1)(c) is not attracted ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in cancelling the penalty of Rs. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s gross or wilful neglect on his part in returning the correct income. The Tribunal did not, in terms, raise the presumption under s. 271(1)(c). It, however, held that the assessee had not been negligent grossly or wilfully in returning the income, nor was there any question of fraud involved in the case. It has been held by this court in Hansraj Aggarwal v. Addl. CIT [1979] 119 ITR 688 (MP), th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t. for the low income co-operative housing society contract because of certain specific reasons. Those reasons have not been stated by the Tribunal and we are, therefore, unable to judge whether the finding of the Tribunal that the assessee was not grossly or wilfully negligent in submitting the return is correct or not. In our opinion, the Tribunal should first raise the presumption under the Exp .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X