Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2004 (4) TMI 27

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the revised returns. - As a matter of fact, in the reply to the notice u/s 271(1)(c), the appellants did not offer any credible explanation indicating the reasons for which the amount had not been disclosed in the original returns. - Tribunal was justified in holding that there was concealment warranting levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) - - - - - Dated:- 28-4-2004 - Judge(s) : A. S. VENKATACHALA MOORTHY., P. K. MISRA. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by P.K. MISRA J. - The appellants are partnership concerns deriving income as dealer in timber and tiles. The dispute relates to the assessment years 1986-87 to 1991-92. The appellants had initially filed returns for the different assessment years showing certai .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Tribunal. The Tribunal by order dated April 12, 2000, allowed the appeals filed by the Department by coming to the conclusion that the additional income offered in the revised returns were disclosed only after the Department had taken steps and as such, such disclosure was not voluntary. The present appeals have been filed by the assessee challenging such order of the Tribunal. The assessee has sought to raise the following questions of law: "1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that there was concealment warranting levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c)? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in concluding that the ret .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nation which is found by the Income-tax Officer or the Appellate Assistant Commissioner to be false, or (B) such person offers an explanation which he is not able to substantiate, then, the amount added or disallowed in computing the total income of such person as a result thereof shall, for the purposes of clause (c) of this sub-section, be deemed to represent the income in respect of which particulars have been concealed: Provided that nothing contained in this Explanation shall apply to a case referred to in clause (B) in respect of any amount added or disallowed as a result of the rejection of any explanation offered by such person, if such explanation is bona fide and all the facts relating to the same and material to the computa .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates