TMI Blog2007 (4) TMI 213X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... applications, filed by the Revenue under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, were admitted on the questions of law raised in the respective income-tax applications. The assessment years involved in all these applications are the assessment year 1983-84 to the assessment year 1986-87. The basic question raised in all these applications is, whether the Tribunal was justified in deleting ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rds and arrived at the total turnover of the assessees. As the commission was usually charged at seven per cent. the Assessing Officer computed the commission on the total turnover determined by him which was much higher than the commission income disclosed by the assessees in their returns of income. When the assessees were confronted with the above computation, the assessees submitted that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onal amount as income after the search cannot be a ground to levy penalty because no concealment of income was discovered during the course of search or thereafter. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the Revenue filed appeals before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal and the same were dismissed. The reference applications filed by the Revenue under section 256(1) were also rejected by the Trib ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er, in the present case, the Tribunal has accepted the contentions of the assessees that there was a practice by the commission agents to give return commission and, therefore, the Assessing Officer was not justified in computing the commission income at seven per cent. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has further held that the income computed by the Assessing Officer was purely on estimat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
