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

Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 1977 (7) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

1977 (7) TMI 63 - AT - Income Tax

Issues:
1. Penalty imposition under section 271(1)(c) of the IT Act, 1961 for the assessment year 1971-72.
2. Concealment of income by the assessee.
3. Unexplained investment in the business recorded in Uchanti Bahi.

Analysis:
1. The appeal pertains to the imposition of a penalty of Rs. 25,700 under section 271(1)(c) of the IT Act, 1961 for the assessment year 1971-72. The assessee, engaged in the wholesale business of Sugar, foodgrains, and pulses, initially filed a return showing income of Rs. 23,305, later revised to include an additional income of Rs. 16,500. The Income Tax Officer (ITO) made additions to the income based on discrepancies found during a raid by Sales Tax authorities. The IAC upheld the penalty based on the concealed income amounting to Rs. 18,000 and Rs. 7,700 for unexplained investments. The total penalty imposed was Rs. 25,700.

2. The assessee contended that the income from the business recorded in Uchanti Bahi was not disclosed initially as it was believed to pertain to personal transactions of a partner. However, the Tribunal found inconsistencies in the assessee's explanation and held that the income of Rs. 16,500 was consciously concealed. Citing the Mahavir Metal Works case, the Tribunal concluded that the admission of additional income in the revised return indicated concealment. Therefore, the penalty for this concealment was upheld at Rs. 16,500.

3. Regarding the unexplained investment of Rs. 7,700 in the business recorded in Uchanti Bahi, the Tribunal found discrepancies in the calculations made by the ITO and AAC. The Tribunal determined that there was no concrete evidence to prove conscious concealment of this amount by the assessee. Consequently, no penalty was deemed exigible for this item. The final penalty amount upheld was Rs. 16,500, and the appeal was partly allowed.

This detailed analysis highlights the issues of penalty imposition, concealment of income, and unexplained investments, providing a comprehensive understanding of the judgment delivered by the Appellate Tribunal ITAT Amritsar.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates