9911796707
TMI Blog1990 (1) TMI 103X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 71(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 1980-81. 2. The learned counsel for the assessee has vehemently argued that there was no material before the revenue authorities to levy the penalty of Rs. 72,634. The assessee had filed the return of income on 5-8-1980 declaring the total income at Rs. 18,02,130. However, the assessee, subsequent to the date of filing the original ret ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es worth Rs. 97,613 from Vinodchandra D. Gandhi were not genuine but were in the nature of hawala purchase entries. Since the assessee was a party to the hawala purchases it was aware of the fact and, therefore, it could not be said that it was a bona fide mistake on its part. 4. The Departmental Representative has further pointed out that the revised return was filed by the assessee after the c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the payment of commission, sales, unsecured loans, etc. It also appears that specific enquiries were directed about the hawala purchases. After the assessee received the letter, dated 17-9-1981 from the ITO, it submitted the revised return disclosing the additional sum. 6. It may not be out of place to mention here that there is a letter on record from the D.D.I. in respect of Vinodchandra D. Ga ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he return was aware of the falsity of the statement and the incorrectness of the particulars of income at the time when the original return was filed, there is no question for that person subsequently discovering the existence of the omission or creeping in of the wrong statement in the return already filed by him. Therefore, the revised return of income may absolve the assessee from penal consequ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing of penal consequences, therefore, cannot be stopped by merely filing a revised return. Moreover, the case of the revenue is well supported by the ratio of the decisions adverted to above and relied upon by the Departmental Representative. 7. Keeping in view the facts of the case and the legal position, we are of the view that there was justification to levy the penalty under section 271(1)(c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
