TMI Blog2005 (3) TMI 86X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nal (Tribunal) at the instance of the assessee under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in R.A. Nos. 59 and 60/Ind/1998 dated January 15, 2004, which arises out of an order dated February 12, 1998, passed by the Tribunal in I.T.A. No. 706/Ind/1992 and I.T.A. No. 1000/Ind/1993 to answer the following questions of law said to arise out of the aforementioned appellate orders: "1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in law in confirming the addition of Rs. 30,000 as concealed income of the assessee? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in justifying the levy of penalty of Rs. 18,000 under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 19 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e the Income-tax Officer in the course of assessment proceedings, wherein full facts regarding credit of Rs. 30,000 has been explained with material evidence. From the assessment order, it is evident that the explanation offered by the assessee has been disbelieved and the aid has been termed as an afterthought. The explanation offered and bona fide substantiated by the assessee has not been found false in the assessment proceedings. In short the explanation offered and substantiated by the assessee has been disbelieved/discharged and a sum of Rs. 30,000 has been assessed on account of alleged concealed income which does not ipso facto constitute concealed income of the assessee. The assessee has filed second appeal before the Tribunal chal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the first place, it is a case of concealment on the part of the assessee. Secondly, it is a case where the assessee made an attempt to explain but could not persuade the three authorities of his explanation. Thirdly, the reference court cannot go into the adequacy of the explanation again in its reference jurisdiction in abstract form for want of any legal issue/interpretation involved and lastly, once the addition is upheld then the penalty has got to be imposed consequent upon the rejection of the explanation offered. In other words, once the explanation offered by the assessee is rejected then in that event, a case for imposition of penalty under section 271(1)(c) is made out. It is much more so when there is no technical issue is invol ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
