9911796707
TMI Blog1977 (8) TMI 54X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Act"), this court directed the Cuttack Bench of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to state a case and refer the following question for the opinion of the court: " Whether the amount of penalty imposable should have been worked out on the basis of the law in force at the time the return was filed and the delinquency of excluding a part of the income had been committed ?" The assessee is an indi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ,500. It may be mentioned that the Income-tax Officer had in the order of reassessment included a sum of Rs. 42,000 as income from undisclosed sources and in the quantum appeal the Tribunal had upheld the addition of only Rs. 13,000 as cash credit. The assessee appealed to the Tribunal against the levy of penalty and contended that penalty had been imposed without considering the real facts of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... " (iii) in the cases referred to in clause (c), in addition to any tax payable by him, a sum which shall 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." Undoubtedly, the Amending Act has increased the quantum of imposable penalty. In this background, it has beco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in the case of Jain Brothers v. Union of India [1970] 77 ITR 107 (SC), the court observed-See [1976] 103 ITR 479, 484 (Orissa) : " The aforesaid observations of their Lordships leave absolutely no room for doubt that the penalty proceeding is to be initiated only on the completion of the assessment when the assessing authority would have the satisfac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
