TMI Blog1971 (12) TMI 31X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nion: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the penalty proceedings by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner were valid under the Income-tax Act, 1961 ? " The dispute relates to the assessment year 1963-64. The assessee carries on retail timber business. The Income-tax Officer made ail addition in the trading account to the tune of Rs. 5,432, on the ground that there was no stock register and quantitative tallies and that the result shown by the assessee was lower as compared to the rates applied by the department in earlier years. The Income-tax Officer found a deposit of Rs. 12,162, being a credit to the assessee's account. This amount was also added and the explanation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pellate Assistant Commissioner could not himself impose any penalty on account of concealment not detected by him. The fact as to whether a notice had been issued under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act before the completion of proceedings was not clear to the court and the Tribunal disposed of the contention raised by the assessee on the basis that no such notice had been issued simultaneously with the passing of the above order or some time thereafter. In respect of the contention that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner had no jurisdiction to impose a penalty in respect of concealment detected by the Incometax Officer, the Tribunal held that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner was fully competent to initiate the penalty proceedin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Income-tax Act, 1961, requires is that there must be some proceeding under the Act in the course of which either the Income-tax Officer or the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax reaches the satisfaction about concealment of particulars of income. In the present case, the appellate proceedings were undoubtedly the proceedings under the Act and the Appellate Assistant Commissioner reached the necessary satisfaction in the course of those proceedings. It would thus appear that the conditions requisite for the application of sec tion 271(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, were satisfied. The opening part of section 271(1) of the Act corresponds to section 28(1) of the Indian Income tax Act, 1922. The relevant part of section 28 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tax Act against the assessee when in the course of the appeal proceeding before him he was satisfied that the assessee had deliberately furnished inaccurate particulars of its income in the sense that it debited a sum of Rs. 76,386 on account of excise duty an expenditure which related to another year and could not be debited against the profits of the year under consideration. We are satisfied that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner was legally justified in issuing a notice under section 28 of the Income-tax Act against the assessee." The principle of this decision covers this aspect of the controversy. So far as the first question is concerned, the answer follows from our decision in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Bankey Lal Hira Lal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
