TMI Blog2010 (4) TMI 386X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion was only on account of application of higher rate of net profit by applying the provisions of section 145. There is no evidence on record to show that the assessee had concealed the particulars of income or submitted inaccurate particulars of his income. Tribunal allow the appeal filed by revenue. Held that- the undisputed facts were that particulars furnished by the assessee regarding receipts in the relevant financial year had not been found inaccurate and it was also not the case of revenue that the assessee concealed any income in his return. Thus penalty could not be imposed. - 127 of 1999 - - - Dated:- 19-4-2010 - DHIRENDRA MISHRA, CHANDRAKAR R. N. JJ. Rajeev Shrivastava for the appellant. Ashok Patil for the responden ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ome or submitted inaccurate particulars of his income. In view of the above, the Assessing Officer was not correct in holding that the assessee had concealed the particulars of income by not producing documents in support of the claims made in the return. 3. The Tribunal has further dismissed the appeal of the Revenue with the following observations : "5. I have heard the rival submissions and gone through the orders of the revenue authorities as well as the decisions relied upon by the contending parties. In the instant case, the Revenue has not given reason for adopting the net profit at 10 per cent. in the case of the assessee whereas on similar set of facts in other cases, even a lesser percentage of net profit than declared by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessee. The Assessing Officer has recorded a categorical finding that the assessee did not produce any document in support of his income and expenditure account despite being given repeated opportunities for producing the same. He also did not produce any document before the Appellate Commissioner whereupon his appeal was dismissed against the order of the Assessing Officer and on the basis of this, it has been inferred that the assessee did not possess any such document and thus the assessee has deliberately tried to conceal his income by filing wrong return. 6. Relying upon the decision of the Supreme Court in the matter of Chair-man, SEBI v. Shriram Mutual Fund [2006] 131 Comp Cas 591 ; [2006] 5 SCC 361, it was argued that mens rea is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n Chairman, SEBI [2006] 131 Comp Cas 591 ; [2006] 5 SCC 361, the question before the Supreme Court was whether once it is conclusively established that a mutual fund has violated the terms of certificate of registration and statutory regulations, the imposition of penalty becomes a sine qua non of the violation. Answering in the affirmative and allowing the appeals, the Supreme Court held that mens rea is not an essential ingredient for contravention of the provisions of a civil Act. Unless the language of the statute indicates the need to establish the element of mens rea, it is generally sufficient to prove that a default in complying with the statute has occurred and it is wholly unnecessary to ascertain whether such a violation was inte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... indal [2009] 317 ITR 1 (SC), it has been observed that if the Assessing Officer is satisfied that a person has concealed the particulars of his income or furnished inaccurate particulars of such income, such person may be directed to pay penalty. In paragraph 13, it has been further observed that for applicability of section 271(1)(c), conditions stated therein must exist. 15. The Supreme Court in its latest decision in the matter of CIT v. Reliance Petroproducts P. Ltd. [2010] 322 ITR 158, while considering the applicability of section 271(1)(c) of the Act, held that in order to impose penalty under the aforesaid section, there has to be concealment of particulars of income of the assessee and the assessee must have furnished inaccurate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Court in the aforesaid judgments, we find that the assessee furnished accurate particulars of the entire receipt of Rs.21,76,274. After deduction towards expenditure and addition of net profit through other sources, taxable net income was shown at Rs. 70,818. However, since the assessee did not produce any evidence and books of account including the balance-sheet for the assessment year, net profit was estimated at the rate of 10 per cent. of the receipt from all sources and on difference of profit so estimated, additional tax was imposed and it was further directed that proceeding under section 271(1)(c) of the Act for imposition of penalty be separately drawn against the assessee for concealment of income by not producing proper evidenc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
