TMI Blog2004 (2) TMI 34X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - Dated:- 9-2-2004 - Judge(s) : N. K. SOOD., J. S. NARANG. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by N. K. SUD J. -CM No. 1473-CU of 2003: This application has been filed for condonation of delay in refiling the appeal. C. M. is allowed. Delay in refiling the appeal is condoned. I. T. A. No. 140 of 2003: The Revenue has filed this appeal under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short "the Act"), against the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar Bench, Amritsar (for short "the Tribunal"), dated January 30, 2003, dismissing its appeal, against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) (for short "the CIT(A)") cancelling the penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... his report to the Assessing Officer, Muktsar, who on the basis of the said report, issued notice under section 148 of the Act on January 28,1992. In response to the said notice, the assessee filed another return on February 4, 1993, declaring an income of Rs. 2,02,190 which was the income declared by him in the earlier return filed on March 7, 1991. This return was filed under protest as the assessee claimed that no income had escaped assessment. The assessee's objection was overruled and assessment on the basis of this return was made under section 143(3) of the Act on March 7,1994, at the income of Rs. 2,02,190 which was the income disclosed in the return. While completing the assessment, the Assessing Officer also initiated penalty proc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... i.e., vide assessment order dated March 11, 1991, and assessment order dated March 7, 1994, there was no scope for levy of penalty in pursuance of the assessment order dated March 7, 1994. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), accordingly, cancelled the penalty. The Revenue preferred an appeal before the Tribunal which has been dismissed vide the impugned order in the following terms: "4. We have heard both the parties at length and have also gone through the orders of the authorities below. At the very outset, we may point out the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) is based on correct appreciation of facts and law and, therefore, no interference is called for. It is an admitted position that the assessee fil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rder of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) requires no interference at our level and accordingly we uphold the same." A bare perusal of the findings recorded by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and the Tribunal shows that the entire undisclosed income in respect of which penalty has been imposed had been disclosed in the return filed by the assessee voluntarily on March 7,1991. Assessment on the basis of this return was framed under section 143(1) of the Act on March 11, 1991. No penalty proceedings had been initiated at that time. Once the entire amount stood assessed, there was no scope for issue of a fresh notice under section 148 of the Act to assess the same income once again. Penalty proceedings during the cour ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
