TMI Blog1983 (7) TMI 341X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) have been made by the Tribunal, Patna Bench. The following question of law has been referred for opinion of this Court. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in setting aside the orders of the departmental authorities imposing penalty on the assessee, in view of the law engrafted in section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and the explana ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g ₹ 8,300 as cash credit computed the total income after depreciation at ₹ 99,883. On appeal to the AAC, the assessment as made by the ITO was confirmed. On further appeal to the Tribunal the total income was reduced to ₹ 99,626. 5. The ITO initiated proceedings under section 271(1)(c) for both the assessment years. The matter was referred to the IAC. For the assessment year 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fter the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Anwar Ali [1970] 76 ITR 696 and, there fore, no penalty could be imposed on this ground. 7. The learned senior standing counsel for the revenue vehemently argued that the appellate orders of the Tribunal were clearly erroneous as after the insertion of the Explanation to section 271(1)(c), the initial onus of proving that there has be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he learned senior standing counsel for the department relied on the case of CIT v. Parmanand Advani [1979] 119 ITR 464 (Pat.) and on the case of Vishwakarma Industries v. CIT [1982] 135 ITR 652 (Punj. Har.) (FB). All these cases have been considered by this Court in Tax Case No. 62 of 1974 decided on 16-3-1983. Furthermore the principle is fully discussed and settled by the cases of CIT v. Patna ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
