1990 (4) TMI 31

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... me-tax Act, 1961 (for short "the Act"), is filed at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Allahabad. Four questions have been proposed in this application. The sum and substance of these questions is whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal erred in confirming the order passed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax by which he deleted the penalty under section 271(1)(a) o .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d to decision of the Supreme Court in Gujarat Travancore Agency v. CIT [1989] 177 ITR 455 and in particular to the following observations appearing in the judgment (at page 458) : ".... there is nothing in section 271 (1) (a) which requires that mens rea must be proved before penalty can be levied under that provision ... We hold that the element of mens rea was not required to be proved in the p .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ttle late. This explanation of the assessee was accepted by the first appellate authority as well as by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal remarked: ". . . since the entire tax payable by the assessee had been deducted at source, we are inclined to accept that the assessee had a bona fide belief that he will not be required to file the return. We accordingly decline to interfere with .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X