TMI Blog1988 (8) TMI 82X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... missioner against the penalty order of the Income-tax Officer ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner cannot initiate penalty proceedings under clause (b) of section 251(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in the course of appeal proceedings, filed against penalty order, passed under section 271(1)(a) by the Income-tax Officer ?" The relevant assessment years are 1974-75 and 1975-76. The Income-tax Officer imposed penalties under section 271 ( 1 )(a) of the Act on the assessee of different amounts in respect of the two assessment years. The assessee preferred appeals to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. The Appellate Assistant Commission ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee against imposition of penalty. The Tribunal has also mentioned that upholding the competence of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner to impose penalty in such proceedings would amount to depriving the assessee of one appeal which he would have otherwise, if the penalty is imposed initially by the Income-tax Officer. The answer to that, obviously, is in sub-section (1) of section 271 itself, which empowers not only the Income-tax Officer, but also the Appellate Assistant Commissioner to initiate penalty proceedings as provided therein. Reference has also been made to section 251 ( 1) (b) of the Act, which deals with the powers of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner while disposing of an appeal against an order imposing penal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 28(1)(a) if he thought that such an order should be passed on the facts and circumstances of the case. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner was, therefore, entitled, while dealing with the appeal pending before him, to pass an order under section 28 ( 1 ) (a) imposing a penalty. " We find no reason to construe the expression "in the course of any proceedings under this Act" used in sub-section (1) of section 271 differently when the very same expression in section 28(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, was construed in the above manner. The contents of section 251(1)(b) are also similar to the corresponding provision in the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. With respect, we concur with the view of the Division Bench of the Allahabad High ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
