1971 (3) TMI 33

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... x Appellate Tribunal for the opinion of this court. They are as follows : "(1) Whether the provision for imposition of a penalty under clause (C) of sub-section (1) of section 28 of the Income-tax Act, 1922, is of a penal nature? (2) Whether the onus of establishing the conditions requisite for the imposition of a penalty under section 28(1)(c) of the Act lies upon the revenue ? (3) Whether the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... -56 the Income-tax Officer noticed a number of cash credits totalling Rs. 19,600 in the accounts of different persons. The Income-tax Officer considered the explanation of those persons as to the source of the deposits and did not believe them. He treated the total amount of cash credits as the income of the assessee from undisclosed sources and included it in the total income of the assessee. In .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e did not appeal against the assessment order. Thereafter the Income-tax Officer initiated proceedings under section 28(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, in respect of each of the two assessment years mentioned above. The assessee attempted the same explanation as had been adduced by it during the assessment proceedings and with the same result. The Income-tax Officer levied a penalty of Rs. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of its income or deliberately furnished inaccurate particulars thereof. It has observed that the assessments proceeded on the basis of estimates and inferences and that the existence of the income had not been established beyond reasonable doubt. Upon this ground it has found that the provisions of section 28(1)(c) are not attracted. A long catena of cases had been referred to and discussed by the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ard to the circumstances, the Supreme Court held that, in the absence of cogent material evidence from which it could be inferred that the respondent had concealed the particulars of his income or had deliberately furnished in accurate particulars and that the disputed amount was a revenue receipt, the penalty could not be imposed. Following the law laid down by the Supreme Court in this case we a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X