TMI Blog1984 (7) TMI 11X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 60-61 and l961-62, the Income-tax Officer levied penalty under sections 271(1)(a) and 273(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. In appeals against that order of the Income-tax Officer to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner as well as the Tribunal, it was held that the provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961, were not applicable to the assessment years in question and the penalty levied was unauthorised. It was accordingly set aside. On a reference to this court in I.T.R.C. Nos. 32 to 37 of 1968, the High Court held that penalty could be validly levied for the assessment years in question under section 271(1)(a) and under section 273(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Thereupon, the Tribunal took up the matter for final disposal. The assessee's re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... te Assistant Commissioner, after considering the objections upheld the levy of penalty but enhanced it to the statutory minimum. Against the said order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, the assessee preferred appeals to the Appellate Tribunal. Before the Tribunal, it was urged that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner has no jurisdiction to enhance the penalty after the decision of this court in 1. T. R. C. Nos. 32 to 37 of 1968. It was also urged that on the merits of the matter, the Income-tax Officer ought not to have levied the penalty since the assessee had not disregarded the obligations under law. On both the contentions, the Tribunal found no substance. The Tribunal found that the Income-tax Officer failed to work out the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he penalty conferred on the Appellate Assistant Commissioner under section 251(1)(b) has nothing to do with the view taken by this court in ITRC Nos. 32 to 37 of 1968. The decision of this court was only to the effect that the Income-tax Officer has power under the provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961, to levy penalty for the years in question. This court did not go into the question as to the quantum of penalty leviable. This court never observed that the quantum levied by the Income-tax Officer was correct. When the matter went back to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, the validity of the penalty leviable under sections 271(1)(a) and 273(b) was left open. It is not in dispute and indeed cannot be disputed that the Income-tax Offi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
