9911796707
TMI Blog1995 (11) TMI 47X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssment year 1969-70, the Income-tax Officer examined the stock register produced by the assessee and found that there was discrepancy of 1,000 kgs. of aluminium. It was found that as on June 21, 1968, the quantity of aluminium in stock was shown at 3,147 kgs. as against the correct quantity of 4,147 kgs. The Income-tax Officer held that the assessee had sold 1,000 kgs. of aluminium outside the boo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... held by the Tribunal to be without jurisdiction and was set aside. Under the aforesaid circumstances, at the instance of the Revenue, the following question has been referred to us for opinion : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally correct in setting aside the penalty order passed by the Income-tax Officer imposing a penalty of Rs. 20,000 under s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion (1) of section 271, if in a case falling under clause (c) of that sub-section, the amount of income (as determined by the Income-tax Officer on assessment) in respect of which the particulars have been concealed or inaccurate particulars have been furnished exceeds a sum of twenty-five thousand rupees, the Income-tax Officer shall refer the case to the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner who sha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... preme Court in Varkey Chacko v. CIT [1993] 203 ITR 885. The Supreme Court has held that the penalty proceedings can be initiated only after the assessment order has been made which finds such concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars. Who, at this point of time, has the authority to impose the penalty is what is relevant. In this view, the Income-tax Officer had jurisdiction to impose pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
