9911796707
TMI Blog1999 (7) TMI 34X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... atement of the case for opinion of this court on the following question : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in cancelling the penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ? Shorn of all details it emerges that the assessee first filed his returns for the assessment years 1983-84 1984-85 1985-86 and 1986-87 showing incom ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rried the matter to the Tribunal and succeeded. The Tribunal held as under : The assessee had no chance of carrying through his explanation and the Assessing Officer too did not record any finding as to the acceptability or otherwise of the explanation of the assessee. Under these circumstances the proviso to Explanation 1 to section 271 is not attracted. The Revenue did not at all discharge the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ain disallowances but that does not absolve the Revenue from proving the mens rea of a quasi-criminal offence." We find ourselves in agreement with the view taken by the Tribunal. It is well settled that under section 271(1)(c) the initial burden lies on the Revenue to establish that the assessee had concealed the income or had furnished inaccurate particulars of such income. The burden shifts to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... could be treated as bona fide in the facts and circumstances of the case. Therefore the Tribunal was justified in cancelling the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer and affirmed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) in the facts and circumstances of the case. This reference is accordingly answered in the affirmative holding that the Tribunal was justified in doing so. & ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
