9911796707
TMI Blog1983 (7) TMI 12X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... come-tax Appellate Tribunal, Patna Bench " B ", Patna, for opinion on the following question of law Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the quantum of penalty should have been calculated on the basis of the provisions of the Act in force prior to April 1. 1968 ? " The case relates to the assessment year 1966-67. The assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s levied under s. 271(1)(c) read with s.. 274(2) of the Act. The assessee filed an appeal to the Tribunal and submitted that a sum of Rs. 11,349 was endorsed by the assessee to a District Magistrate and the same was deposited in the Government account towards satisfaction of the shortages that had occurred from time to time. It was only Rs. 5,255 which was actually received by the assessee under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the quantum of penalty was excessive. The Tribunal accepted the submission of the assessee's representative that the quantum of penalty, in the instant case, should be calculated on the basis of the provisions of the Act in force prior to April 1, 1968, and not the amended law in force thereafter. On the facts and in the circumstances mentioned above, it is clear that the Tribunal has erred in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the quantum of penalty should have been calculated on the basis of the provisions of the Act in force prior to April 1, 1968. Mr. Rameshwar Prasad, learned counsel for the assessee, urged a point that the Tribunal ought to have given a relief with regard to the expenditure incurred by the assessee in earning the revenue. That, however, is not the subject-matter of a reference and we refrain f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
