TMI Blog1986 (1) TMI 71X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iew of the fact that the assessee has agreed in writing to the addition of the concealed income of Rs. 2,33,687 and also to the levy of penalty, the .Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law in deleting the penalty ignoring the admission made by the assessee? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law in finding that there is no concealment in respect of income from interest on gold and D.P.N. loans and is not this finding wrong and unreasonable and based on surmises only ? 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, there were materials for the Tribunal to hold that there is double addition to the extent of Rs. 53,831 being interest on deposit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... peal noticed that the assessee before filing the return had made a disclosure in the petition for settlement and had also in the covering letters attached to the return explained the sources of income and in the course of the proceedings furnished all relevant particulars relating to advances and deposits before the Income-tax Officer and finally agreed to the addition being made. The Tribunal, on examining the details, concluded that there had been no concealment of particulars in respect of income from advances outside the books or the interest income from bogus deposits and that no penalty is exigible merely on the agreement to penalty. The Tribunal also found that there was double addition of Rs. 53,831 as the total interest on bogus de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mber Works v. CIT [1971] 79 ITR 63 (Delhi), Western Automobiles (India) v. CIT [1978] 112 ITR 1048 (Bom), Banaras Chemical Factory v. CIT [1977] 108 ITR 96 (All) and India Sea Foods v. CIT [1978] 114 ITR 124 (Ker), in support of the contention that when the assessee concedes that a particular item of income is concealed, such a concession will justify the imposition of penalty. According to the Revenue, penalty had been levied for earlier assessment years on the basis of similar concession and the conclusion of the Tribunal for this year is perverse. We are unable to accept these contentions. It is true that the disclosure made by the assessee covers the period from 1962-63 to 1969-70 and that for the earlier assessment years, penalty was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... alment on the part of the assessee. The Explanation thereof inserted with effect from April 1, 1964, merely raises a rebuttable presumption, but the basic principle that there should have been concealment still remains. The legal fiction created by the Explanation can be displaced if there is material to show that the failure to return the correct income did not arise from any fraud or gross or wilful neglect on the part of the assessee. As observed by the Delhi High Court in CIT v. Mohan Das Hassa Nand [1983] 141 ITR 203 (headnote): "The whole purpose of section 271(1)(c) was that where an assessee did not declare his proper income in the return and as a result thereof income could have escaped assessment but for the diligence or investi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
