TMI Blog2001 (7) TMI 67X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ction 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short "the Act"): "(1) Whether, on the facts and in-the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that penalty was exigible in this case? (2) When the learned Inspecting Assistant Commissioner had imposed penalty under the substantive provisions of section 271(1)(c) and had not at all referred to Explanation of section 271(1) whil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the ground that the commission claimed to have been paid to sub-agents was not substantiated. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner (in short, "the AAC") in appeal reduced the total income by Rs.6,000 and out of this deduction of Rs.5,000 related to the commission paid to one person, Ravinder Malik. The Tribunal by its order in 1. T. A. No. 4392 of 1969-70 confirmed the disallowance while sustain ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l by the assessee. Having noted all the factual aspects, the Tribunal came to hold that the commission claimed to have been paid to J. Mohan was not justified and the claim was untenable. With regard to the other sub-agents, the Tribunal took the view that in law the assessee could not have been said to have proved that the claim for expenditure did not arise from any fraud or wilful negligence on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
