TMI Blog1971 (1) TMI 43X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . SWARUP. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by H. SWARUP J.- The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred to us the following question of law : " Whether, on the, facts and in the circumstances of the case, the view taken by the Appellate Tribunal that no penalty is exigible is sound in law ? " The assessee is a registered firm carrying on business in grain commission a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... epancy was due to the wrong naming of the grains by the bank authorities, that certain stocks of one Amar Singh were also pledged to the bank and that it was the general practice to declare 5 per cent. excess grain. The explanation was not accepted. On appeal, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner restricted the addition to Rs. 25,406(?). It was farther reduced bythe Income-tax Appellate Tribunal t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o the conclusion that merely because the explanation given by the assessee had not been accepted by the taxing authorities it could not be held that the assessee had concealed the particulars of his income so as to make him liable to penalty under section 28(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1922. It came to the conclusion that as there was no positive evidence to bring home the default to the assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at he had concealed the particulars of his income. It was held in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Anwar Ali that in the absence of cogent material evidence, apart from the falsity of the respondent's explanation, from which it could be inferred that the respondent had concealed the particulars of his income or had deliberately furnished inaccurate particulars of such income, the penalty ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
