9911796707
TMI Blog1974 (9) TMI 12X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Rs. 1,10,088 and the other of Rs. 4,96,868. The finding was that the assessee had deliberately concealed the particulars of its income in respect of these two items. On appeal, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner held that the explanation of the assessee for non-inclusion of the items of Rs. 1,10,088 was plausible and believable. He, therefore, deleted the penalty in relation to this item. With regard to the other item, namely, of Rs. 4,96,868 he confirmed the finding of the Income-tax Officer that the assessee had been guilty of deliberately furnishing incorrect particulars of its income and as such he imposed a penalty of Rs. 37,500 in relation to it. Both sides went up in appeal to the Tribunal. The Tribunal discussed the matter in d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ordance with law that no penalty is called for under section 28(1)(c) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, in respect of the items of Rs. 1,10,088 and Rs. 4,96,868 ? " It is true that the Tribunal has not discussed separately the item of Rs. 1,10,088 but the above-mentioned findings are equally applicable to this item as well. They are more or less in affirmation of the finding of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner in regard to the item of Rs. 1,10,088. Having heard learned counsel, we are satisfied that the Tribunal, on the findings reached by it, was justified in affirming the deletion of penalty on the item of Rs. 1,10,088. The case with regard to the item of Rs. 4,96,868, however, stands on a different footing. The method of acco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e entire sale proceeds had been received by the assessee-company in the year 1952-53 but the balance was not transferred to the profit and loss account. This state of affairs continued in the years 1952-53 to 1955-56, although no fresh amount was received by the assessee. It was for the first time in 1956 that the company's auditors pointed out that the sum of Rs. 4,96,868 was liable to be taxed during the assessment year 1952-53 and in pursuance thereof the company filed a revised return surrendering the said amount for taxation during the assessment year 1952-53. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner had found that the company filed the revised return only after it felt that the Income-tax Officer had discovered an omission of this amou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ehalf of the assessee that the Income-tax Officer had made such a note on the balance-sheet of the company. In this view, it cannot be said that there was nothing on the record to show that the Income-tax Officer compared the entries in the present balance-sheet with the balance-sheet of the earlier year. The Income-tax Officer could not have suspected the maintenance of consistent balances unless he had looked into the balance-sheets of more than one year. The Tribunal was in error in holding that there was nothing on record to show that the Income-tax Officer had compared the balance-sheets of more than one year. A perusal of the Tribunal's order shows that this was one of the predominant features which influenced the mind of the Tribunal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nclude this amount in its revised return. In this view, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner found that it was a case of deliberately furnishing inaccurate particulars of income in the return because there was three years' delay in surrendering these profits. The Tribunal, on the other hand, omitted to consider these various aspects of the matter relating to the auditor. It straightaway accepted the assessee's contention that, as soon as the auditors pointed out this mistake, it immediately filed a revised return surrendering the sum of Rs. 4,96,868. On the other hand, we find that the Tribunal had referred to the auditor's report dated 31st March, 1952. That report has nothing to do with regard to the transaction of Rs. 4,96,868. That repo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
