Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2013 (7) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (7) TMI 848 - HC - Income TaxPenalty u/s 271(1) - Whether the Tribunal was justified in confirming the levy of penalty in the absence of recording of satisfaction within the meaning of section 271(1)(c) before initiation of the proceedings under section 271(1)(c) - the contention of the appellant that recording of a satisfaction is absent in the instant case is wholly without reason - section 271(1B) the satisfaction being a deemed satisfaction the question of recording of satisfaction within the meaning of section 271(1)(c) does not arise for consideration – decided in favour of revenue. Validity of Penalty - Whether the Tribunal is justified in confirming the penalty even though the discrepancy alleged was on March 22, 1999 (date of survey) relating to the assessment year 1999-2000 and the impugned penalty was levied for the assessment year 1995-96 even though no discrepancy whatsoever was found relating to the year, under challenge - From the replies of the assessee it is evident that a substantial discrepancy was found for the assessment year 1995-96 - assessee has also admitted to the same - the Tribunal was justified in confirming the penalty – decided in favour of revenue. Validity of revised return - Whether the appellant having filed the revised return of income voluntarily and the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) was exigible - The assessee admitted the concealment and, consequently, filed a revised return wherein the admitted undisclosed income as well as the undisclosed stock was disclosed in the return - it cannot be considered as a return of income having been filed voluntarily – thus the assessee is liable for penalty – decided in favour of revenue. Following precedents - Whether the Tribunal was justified in contradicting from its own findings given in the cases relied upon before it - Tribunal was justified in applying the law to the facts and circumstances of the present case - the questions of law and the decisions are necessarily based on the facts and circumstances of each of the cases - the said question of law is answered with reference to and in terms of the facts and circumstances of the relevant cases - therefore when the facts in two cases are different, applying the cited decision to another case would be highly erroneous – decided in favour of revenue – appeal decided against assessee.
|