9911796707
TMI Blog1974 (1) TMI 17X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... court under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as " the Act ") at the instance of the revenue : " Whether the Tribunal was right in law in deleting the penalty by applying the principles of the Supreme Court decision in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Anwar Ali [1970] 76 ITR 696 (SC) to the levy of penalty in this case under section 271(1)(c) after its amendment by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tribunal held : " Reliance is placed on the now well-known decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Anwar Ali [1970] 76 ITR 696 (SC). While it is true that the inclusion of the cash credits have been upheld by the Appellate Tribunal in the corresponding quantum of assessment on the ground that the assessee has failed to prove satisfactorily its claim that the amo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... income of the assessee." The Tribunal obviously lost sight of the fact that with effect from April 1, 1964, an Explanation had been added to section 271(1)(c) of the Act wherein it has been provided that where the total income returned by any person is less than 80 per cent. of the total income as assessed under section 143, the assessee shall, unless he proves that the failure to return the cor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation. Reliance is placed on the decision of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Scindia Steam Navigation Co. Ltd. [1961] 42 ITR 589 (SC) and Commissioner of Wealth-tax v. Ramaraju Surgical Cotton Mills Ltd. [1967] 63 ITR 478 (SC). There is no doubt that unless the question raised arises out of the appellate order it is not one which is open to reference. We are, however, of the vie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or disposal of a case covered by the amendment. We do not think the assessee's stand, that such a question cannot be canvassed before us because it never arose out of the appellate order, can be sustained. Our answer to the question referred to us shall, therefore, be that the Tribunal was not right in law in deleting the penalty by applying the principles of the Supreme Court decision in Anwar A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
