9911796707
TMI Blog1986 (7) TMI 77X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as " the Act "), the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Indore Bench, 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 right in law in holding that even in such cases of agreed addition to the total income on account of unexplained investments, the Department had ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rs. 40,000 over and above the income declared by the assessee under the voluntary disclosure scheme was called for. Learned counsel for the assessee agreed to this addition. The Income-tax Officer thereupon assessed the income of the assessee at Rs. 1,64,670. The Income-tax Officer also initiated penalty proceedings under section 271 (1)(c) of the Act. The matter of imposition of penalty was then ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d. The Tribunal accordingly allowed the appeal. Aggrieved by that order, the Revenue sought a reference and it is at the instance of the Revenue that the aforesaid question of law has been referred to this court for its opinion. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we have come to the conclusion that this reference must be answered in the affirmative and against the Revenue. As observed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and CIT v. Krishna & Co. [1979] 120 ITR 144 (Mad). However, in view of the decision of this court in Addl. CIT v. Bhartiya Bhandar [1980] 122 ITR 622 (MP), it must be held that when surrender is made to purchase peace or for other similar reasons, the surrender cannot amount to an admission, constituting evidence of concealment in penalty proceedings. For all these reasons, our answer to the que ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
