TMI Blog1972 (2) TMI 15X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... red by HARI SWARUP J.-At the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following questions of law under Section 66(1) of the Income-tax Act: " (1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal, was justified in holding that there was no evidence on record at the time the assessments were completed to show that the assessee-firm had concealed its income or had furnished inaccurate particulars thereof ? (2) If the answer to the above question is in the negative, whether the Income-tax Officer could, at the time of levying the penalty under section 28(1)(c) of the Act, take into account also the additional evidence brought on record after the assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... enami name adopted by the assessee for business. He included an additional amount on the basis of this finding in the income of the assessee. The Income-tax Officer also initiated proceedings for imposing penalty on the assessee under section 28(1)(c) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. Appeals were preferred against the assessment orders by Satya Deo as well as by the assessee-firm. On July 8, 1962, Baburam gave a statement which was recorded on the order-sheet in which he agreed that the telegraphic transfers and demand drafts in the name of Satya Deo may be treated in his hands and the balance may be taxed in the firm's name at the net rate of ten per cent. The Income-tax Officer considering the material before him imposed the penalty. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f. The revenue, feeling aggrieved by this order, applied under section 66(1) of the Act and the aforementioned two questions have been referred to us by the Tribunal. Having regard to the controversy between the parties before the Tribunal and the decisions given by the Tribunal, we consider that the questions framed by the Tribunal do not correctly bring out the controversy. We accordingly reframe the questions in the following manner: " (1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that there was no evidence on record when the penalty proceedings were initiated to establish that the assessee-firm had concealed its income or had deliberately furnished inaccurate particul ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ve to be answered in the affirmative. The penalty proceedings were initiated on 21st March, 1962. Two pieces of additional evidence, according to the department, came into existence subsequently, which were sufficient to provide the missing link and to connect the business of Lakshmi Co. with the business of the assessee-firm. The first piece of evidence which came into being on July 28, 1962, is the statement of Baburam, one of the partners of the assessee-firm, to the following effect : " We agree to the net rate of 10% and the telegraphic transfers and demand drafts in the name of Satya Deo to be treated in his hands and the balance may be taxed in the firm's case." The penalty proceedings were completed after this date, i.e., Fe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
