9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (9) TMI 260X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... are not applicable in this case by ignoring the material fact that the addition responsible for levy of penalty was confirmed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal itself and held to be a device to claim a non-existent loss." 2. The assessee had a paid up capital of Rs. 25 lakhs. According to the assessee, the intrinsic value of the equity shares was Rs. 19,53,680 and, therefore, taking a realistic view of the matter, the assessee decided to reduce the share capital to Rs. 20 lakhs. In accordance with the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, the assessee applied to the Calcutta High Court for permission to reduce the share capital. By its order dated December 21, 1972, the Calcutta High Court permitted the reduction of capital and cance ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l not be less than, but which shall not exceed twice, the amount of the income in respect of which the particulars have been concealed or inaccurate particulars have been furnished. Explanation.- Where the total income returned by any person is less than eighty per cent. of the total income (hereinafter in this Explanation referred to as the correct income) as assessed under section 143 or section 144 or section 147 (reduced by the expenditure incurred bona fide by him for the purpose of making or earning any income included in the total income but which has been disallowed as deduction), such person shall, unless he proves that the failure to return the correct income did not arise from any fraud or any gross or wilful neglect on his part ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as committed any kind of fraud. 11. It is difficult to say, on the facts of the present case, that the assessee had committed any fraud notwithstanding the strong words used by the Tribunal in the quantum matter. The assessee was entitled to determine the intrinsic value of its shares, which it did. Thereafter, in order to reduce its share capital, the assessee is obliged to proceed in accordance with law and so the assessee approached the Calcutta High Court for reduction of its share capital. After considering the materials on record, the Calcutta High Court permitted the assessee to reduce its share capital in terms of its order dated December 21, 1972. 12. It is nobody's case that the Calcutta High Court was defrauded by the assessee. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
