TMI Blog1988 (7) TMI 33X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , has referred the following question of law to this court for its opinion : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessee was guilty of concealing the particulars of his income and was liable to pay penalty under the provisions of section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?" The relevant facts giving rise to this refer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not so claimed and was claimed for the first time in the assessment year 1971-72. It was also contended that there was no conscious concealment of income. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner held that as the deduction in question had not been claimed previously and as the assessee had claimed it for the first time in the assessment year 1971-72, it could not be held that the assessee was liable ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ay penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act, it must be found that the assessee had consciously concealed the particulars of income. In the instant case, the assessee had claimed a certain deduction and unless it was held that the assessee had deliberately claimed false deduction, the assessee could not be held liable to pay penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. Now, the finding of the App ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er section 271(1)(c) of the Act, as during the year under consideration neither any payment was made by the assessee nor any demand notice was received." The Tribunal has not thus found that the expenditure claimed by the assessee was not incurred at all, or that it was claimed in earlier years and that the assessee deliberately made a false claim for deduction in the assessment year in question ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
