TMI Blog2005 (7) TMI 35X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench "A", has referred the following question under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, ("the Act"), at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax. "Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in deleting the penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) on the ground that there cannot be any question of concealment of income when there is no income?" The assessment year is 1983-84. The assessee filed a return of income declaring total loss of Rs. 3,37,414. The assessee was assessed on a total income of Rs. 2,94,480. In the return of loss the assessee, who is a manufacturer of common salt, claimed loss of 6,200 tonnes of salt washed away on account of cyclone (5100 tonnes) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1)(c) of the Act. It was found that a particular loss was claimed on an estimated basis; that the estimate was reduced by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) because no verification was possible of the actual loss. Therefore, according to the Commissioner (Appeals), it was only a matter of opinion on which the addition could be sustained or reduced. He, therefore, deleted the penalty. The Revenue carried the matter in appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal upheld the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) on a different ground. According to the Tribunal, penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act cannot be imposed when ultimately there is a loss. For this purpose, the Tribunal took the assistance of the decision in the c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... als) and the Tribunal have found and come to the conclusion that the penalty is not leviable in the present case, though for different reasons. In the light of the peculiar facts of the case, without entering into any discussion as to the legal position, the Tribunal's order requires no interference in the light of the findings of fact recorded by the Commissioner (Appeals). The question referred is, therefore, answered in the affirmative, i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue only to the extent of upholding the Tribunal's order that it was justified in deleting the penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. The reference stands disposed of accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs. - - TaxTMI - TMIT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
