TMI Blog1991 (8) TMI 13X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of 1974, required the Tribunal to state the case and refer the following questions of law for determination by this court : "(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in cancelling the penalty levied under the Explanation to section 271(1)(c) ? (2) Whether the finding given by the Tribunal could reasonably be arrived at on the basis of material ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. According to the Tribunal, therefore, the estimate could be a ground for addition but not a ground for levying penalty. As we have stated above, the Department wanted the two questions to be referred to this court but the Tribunal declined and, therefore, at the instance of the Department, the Tribunal was directed to state the case and has referred the two questions quoted above for the determ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... led or inaccurate particulars have been furnished exceeds a sum of twenty-five thousand rupees, the Income-tax Officer shall not issue any direction for payment by way of penalty without the previous approval of the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner. " The facts stated above clearly disclose that the assessee first showed a loss of Rs. 50,000. Then he revised the return, showing profit of Rs. 7, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ifficult to swallow that since the assessee's income was assessed on estimate basis, the assessee was not liable to any penalty. Instead, we find that the reasons assigned by the Tribunal have no basis under the law. We, therefore, have no hesitation in holding that the Appellate Tribunal took an absolutely incorrect view of law by exonerating the assessee from penalty. As we have stated earlier, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
