TMI Blog1983 (8) TMI 45X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... finding in the assessment order of the same date that the assessee-firm had concealed certain items of income for the year 1973-74. The ITO thereafter made a reference to the IAC for imposing penalty as the amount of concealed income exceeded the sum of Rs. 25,000 in which event only the IAC had the jurisdiction to impose penalty. The IAC vide his order dated 27th January, 1979, imposed a penal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y penalty under s. 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act ? (2) If the answer to question No. (1) is in the affirmative, whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the levy of penalty under s. 271(1)(c) is valid and justified ? (3) . Whether., on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that there was a clear finding of concealment given by th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be referred to the High Court then so far as the Tribunal is concerned no referable question can be said to arise even if the given question raises a question of law, We entirely concur with the view that the Division Bench in Shiv Parshad's case has taken and, therefore, return the question unanswered. The learned counsel for the assessee-firm sought to challenge the correctness of this court's ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
