TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 140X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reference to the above appeals are as under:- I.T.A.Nos. Assessment Years 198 of 2012 1995-96 215 of 2012 1996-97 216 of 2012 1997-98 217 of 2012 1998-99 218 of 2012 1999-00 219 of 2012 2000-01 220 of 2012 2001-02 2. The following substantial questions of law arise for consideration. i) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, is the Appellate Tribunal justified in sustaining the penalty imposed u/s.271(1)(c) for concealment of income/furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income for the Assessment Years? ii) Should not the Appellate Tribunal have held that the order imposing penalty was barred by limitation by virtue of the proviso to Section 275 of the Act? iii) Has not the Appellate Tribunal erred in relying on Explanation-3 to Section 271(1)(c) without noticing the amendment to the above Explanation with effect from 01.04.2003 and in sustaining the penalty on that ground? 3. The facts that led to the filing of the present appeals are under:- Appellant assessee, admittedly, was running a poultry farm and a piggery. He wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as no explanation for the amounts reflected in the bank account and so also with regard to the bills that were collected from various shops and hotels. The explanation given by the assessee was, non-availability of an accountant to maintain the books of accounts at a remote village where he was running his business. In the absence of maintaining books of accounts, Assessing Officer, having regard to the vast difference between income voluntarily declared by the assessee and the quantum of amount arrived during the course of re-assessment proceedings, opined that penalty deserves to be imposed. The question is, what should be the percentage of penalty that has to be paid? 7. Admittedly, Section 271(1)(c) proceedings were also initiated and 150% penalty came to be imposed, having regard to the income estimated in all the above said assessment years. Apart from the vast variance in the quantum of income disclosed and arrived at during reassessment, the fact remains, none of the obligations required to be discharged by the assessee, were discharged. Non-maintenance of books of accounts as the income in all these years exceeded prescribed limit was also glaring at the assessee. Apart ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... matter of revision under Section 263 [or Section 264] after the expiry of six months from the end of the month in which such order of revision is passed;] [(c) in any other case, after the expiry of the financial year in which the proceedings, in the course of which action for the imposition of penalty has been initiated, are completed, or six months from the end of the month in which action for imposition of penalty is initialled, whichever period expires later.] [(1A) In a case where the relevant assessment or other order is the subject-matter of an appeal to the Commissioner(Appeals) under section 246 or section 246A or an appeal to the Appellate Tribunal under section 253 or an appeal to the High Court under section 260A or an appeal to the Supreme court under section 261 or revision under Section 263 or section 264 and an order imposing or enhancing or reducing or cancelling penalty or dropping the proceedings for the imposition of penalty is passed before the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) or the Appellate Tribunal or the High Court or the Supreme Court is received by the Chief Commissioner or the Commissioner or the order of revision under Section 263 or Section 26 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in 2004. In all the appeals the initiation of penalty proceedings were much prior to 31.03.2008. Therefore, the contention of limitation raised by the appellant- assessee that proceedings are barred by limitation for imposing penalty as contemplated under Section 275 of the Act is not available to the appellant-assessee. None of the contentions with reference to Section 275 of the Act are available to the appellant assessee. 11. Then coming to Section 271(1)(c) of the Act, we fail to understand why learned counsel for the appellant-assessee is placing much emphasis on Explanation 3 to Section 271 of the Act. The assessment order and the orders of the CIT (Appeals) clearly indicate that there was no reference, so far as Explanation 3 to Section 271 of the Act. Based on the main Section 271(c), the penalty proceedings were made by the Assessing Officer, after completion of the reassessment proceedings. 12. Deemed concealment is explained under Explanation 3. If all the conditions at Explantaion 3 are complied with, even if the assessee had filed the returns, if the returns are filed beyond the period of limitation or the time prescribed then the department by operation of law has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
