TMI Blog2001 (8) TMI 95X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in deleting the penalty of Rs.46,135, Rs.52,2 10 and Rs.58,065 for the assessment years 1967-68, 1968-69 and 1969-70, respectively, levied under section 271(1)(c)? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, did not the Income-tax Officer have jurisdiction to initiate the penalty proceedings under section 271(1) again, after he had decided the case afresh?" The factual position is almost undisputed and is as follows: For the three assessment years involved, i.e., 1967-68, 1968-69 and 196970, the assessee had filed its returns of income. For the assessment veal1967-68, the return was filed on October 28, 1968, declaring an inc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of disallowance of interest on loans which had been surrendered earlier by the assessee and those which were surrendered before the Income-tax Officer, when he was giving effect to the order passed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. The interest on account of the amounts surrendered earlier came to Rs.45,463, Rs.50,420 and Rs.56,415, respectively, for the three assessment years. There were other amounts for the three assessment years in question which amounted to Rs.13,312, Rs.39,412 and Rs.50,294, respectively. While giving effect to the order passed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, the Income-tax Officer found that the figures would be Rs.672, Rs.1,790 and Rs.1,650, respectively. As noted above the original assessments were ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... no reason to hold that subsequently penalty proceedings cannot be initiated. Though there cannot be any bar and proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act can be initiated at any stage of the proceedings, on the facts of the case we find that the Tribunal's conclusions are in order. Proceedings initiated on the basis of the orders passed on March 30, 1972, were in respect of the higher figures of income. Subsequently, what has been found to be disallowable was Rs.672, Rs.1,790 and Rs.1,650, respectively. Even if these figures are taken into account, the Explanation appended to section 271(1)(c) cannot be made applicable. As noted above, the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner, after consideration of the factual position, held that proc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
