9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (3) TMI 240X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the Assessing Officer has to prove with evidence that there was a deliberate attempt to conceal income before he could invoke the provisions of section 271(1)(c), ignoring the Explanation 1 to section 271 ?" 2. The facts which led to the rise of the above appeal are as under : The assessee filed its return for the relevant assessment year declaring a loss of Rs. 1,30,81,000. While completing the assessment under section 143(3) of the Act, the Assessing Officer made two additions, viz., unexplained credit in the form of shares advance and unexplained sundry credits. The Assessing Officer adjusted the brought forward loss of Rs. 32,94,175 in relation to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to tax, if any, payable by him, a sum of ten thousand rupees for each such failure ; (iii) in the cases referred to in clause (c), in addition to tax, if any, payable by him, a sum which shall not be less than, but which shall not exceed three times, the amount of tax sought to be evaded by reason of the concealment of particulars of his income or the furnishing of inaccurate particulars of such income.' (emphasissupplied)." 4. The words "in addition to tax, if any, payable by him" employed in sub-clauses (ii) and (iii) above and the words "amount of tax sought to be evaded by reason of such concealment of particulars of his income" employed in sub-clause (iii) of section 271(1)(c) of the Act are the deciding factors for invoking penalty ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tax is the sine qua non for imposition of penalty. If there is no taxable income or tax assessed for payment during a particular year, the question of evasion and, consequently, penalty do not arise. The penalty provisions of section 271(1)(c), therefore, are attracted only in the case of an assessee having positive income and not loss, as the question of concealment of income to avoid payment of tax would arise only in the former case. Penalty is a deterrent measure to prevent evasion of tax and when there was no tax payable, there could be any such evasion so as to provide a scope for levying any penalty, vide CIT v. Prithipal Singh and Co. [1990] 183 ITR 69 (P & H). 8. The view taken by the Punjab and Haryana High Court in CIT v. Prit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
