1944 (1) TMI 19

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e why a penalty should not be inflicted as provided in Section 28. The notice was returnable for 10th February 1941. It does not appear on what date the assessee showed cause, but undoubtedly he did so and on 2nd May 1941, the maximum penalty was imposed being l1/2 times the amount of the tax which the non-disclosure, had it succeeded, would have avoided. The material provisions of Section 28 are as follows: Sub-section (1) If the Income-tax Officer, the appellate Assistant Commissioner, or the appellate ' Tribunal in the course of any proceedings under this Act is satisfied that any person (o) has concealed the particulars of his income or deliberately furnished inaccurate particulars of such income he or it may direct that such pe .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... The second case from the Lahore Court is A. Vir Bhan Bansi Lal v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Punjab ('38) 25 A. I. R. 1938 Lah. 749 in which it was decided that an Income-tax Officer is empowered to make an order imposing a penalty under Section 28 after the assessment order had been finally made and the tax had been paid. In my view neither of those cases support the contention. A further authority was quoted by learned Counsel for the assessee, Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras v. Abdul Kadir ('28) 15 A.I.R. 1928 Mad. 257. In that case the proceedings with regard to the assessment were under Section 34 and they were held to be irregular. Consequently, there could have been no discovery during the course of the proceedings which .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... te Tribunal should adopt. Matters in connection with an assessment would not be-before either the appellate Assistant Commissioner or the appellate Tribunal before an assessment has been concluded, and consequently any notice under Sub-section (3) which either the appellate Assistant Commissioner or the appellate Tribunal might see fit to give must be given after the conclusion of the assessment. In my view the answer to the question raised in the present reference should, be in the affirmative, McNair, J. 4. I agree. Section 28(1) provides that the Income-tax Officer, the appellate Assistant Commissioner or the appellate-Tribunal must be satisfied in the course of the proceedings that, so far as we are concerned; in this case, a person .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X