1979 (2) TMI 90

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rred to as " the Act "), for a direction to the Appellate Tribunal to state a case and refer the following question said to be of law for the opinion of the court : " 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee had discharged the onus placed upon it by the Explanation to section 271(1)(c) and in deleting the penalty observing .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ppeal was finalised, penalty under s. 271(1)(c) read with s. 274(2) of the Act was levied by the IAC at Rs. 50,000. On the assessee's appeal, the penalty has been knocked off by the Tribunal. In the second appeal, the Tribunal observed : " ... In the quantum appeal, the Tribunal was called upon to draw an inference from the facts then before it as to whether the agreements with the sub-contrac .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... uent assessment years and the other sub-contractors were so assessed in the subsequent assessment year. The learned counsel for the assessee took us through the depositions of both the sub-contractors and emphasised that they have to be read as a whole and the answers given by the deponents were to be appreciated in the context in which they were given. He has pointed out that Sri Ramesh Chandra S .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X