9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (8) TMI 117X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essment year 2002-03. 2. This appeal had been admitted for examination on the following questions of law. 1. Whether in law and on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in confirming the penalty under section 271(1) (c)? 2. Whether in law and on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in confirming the levy of penalty under section 271(1) (c) in the absence of any recording of satisfaction by the assessing officer in the assessment order before levying penalty under section 271(1) (c) of the Act? 3. Whether in law and on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in confirming the penalty for the assessment years 2000-01 to 2002-03 for which years there is n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... elating to the actual payment had been tampered and reduced as indicated above. 7. It is because of the reduced receipts as indicated by the assessee, the tax liability came down and the assessee had sought for refund from out of the tax deducted at source remitted to the revenue. 8. In such circumstances, the Assessing Officer was of the opinion that the provisions of Section 271(1)(c) of the Act are attracted and therefore, proceeded to levy penalty, which was at Rs. 33,187/- for the assessment year 2000-01, Rs. 96,732/- for the assessment year 2001-02, Rs. 5,987/- for the assessment year 2002-03. 9. Assessee's efforts to get over this levy of penalty by the Assessing Officer before the Commissioner of Income Tax (appeals) and later th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and no occasion arises for this Court to interfere in the appeal. 12. We have bestowed our consideration to the submission made at the Bar. 13. We find that the record does indicate the tampering of record on the part of the assessee, though the explanation given is that the assessee is an ignorant, illiterate person. That explanation itself cannot in any way absolve the assessee and even if the assessee is dependant upon his representative, it cannot be said that if it is to the assessee's benefit he takes advantage of it but disowns his representative, when the violating act is detected. 14. Be that as it may, it is for the assessee to take such action with regard to his representative concerned, but that cannot constitute a ground or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
