TMI Blog1981 (9) TMI 2X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the following are the questions that were directed to be, and have been, referred "(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in cancelling the penalty imposed under the provisions of section 271 (1) (c) for the assessment year 1961-62, when the quantum assessment on the basis of which the penalty came to be imposed by the Department h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... here were also entries in the books showing payment of interest of Rs. 81,040. During the course of the assessment, the assessee contended before the Income-tax Officer that there was a firm called Rambilas Nandlal, the partners of which had a controlling interest in the assessee-company. The said firm had filed a settlement petition to the Central Board of Direct Taxes on May 20, 1965, relating t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssee for the assessment year 1961-62. The Department filed an appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal set aside the assessment as regards the addition of the amount covered by the credit entries and also the disallowance of the interest income. The Inspecting Assistant Commissioner levied penalties in the present case and the question before the Tribunal was whether the penalty of Rs. 27,226 le ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt had been set aside, the penalty proceedings could not have been terminated by the cancellation of penalty. The question as to whether penalty was leviable or not has to be considered in the light of the findings in the assessment to be made as a result of directions given by the Tribunal while setting aside the same. In these circumstances, the Tribunal acted erroneously in cancelling the penal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
