TMI Blog1975 (11) TMI 21X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessment year 1954-55, the assessee filed its return showing an income of Rs. 14,806 consisting of income from dividends of Rs. 1,425 and income from business of Rs. 13,381, on the basis of its books of account. The Income-tax Officer, however, did not accept the said return, but proceeded to make the following three additions to the income returned : (1) Rs. 58,000 being the discrepancy in stoc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... after issuing the show-cause notice and after hearing the assessee, levied penalty of Rs. 43,000 after getting the requisite approval of the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner. There was an appeal against the said levy of penalty before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. Before him various contentions were raised. One of the contentions put forward by the assessee was that even assuming that pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d in so far as it is referable to the actual concealed income " and, in that view, the Tribunal ultimately reduced the penalty to a sum of Rs. 5,000. Aggrieved against the said order of the Tribunal, the revenue sought this reference and the following question of law is referred : " Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in reducing the penalty l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en it expressed the view that the tax actually avoided in so far as it is referable to the actual concealed income should alone be the basis for fixing the penalty, did not have the benefit of the views expressed by the Supreme Court in the above-said decision. In the light of the said Supreme Court decision, the Tribunal's view cannot be held to be right in this case. But section 28(1)(c) only ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... position to say that the Tribunal has not properly exercised its discretion on the facts and circumstances of this case. The result is, though the revenue succeeds in setting aside the view of the Tribunal on the question of law, the reduction of penalty to Rs. 5,000 in the circumstances was not improper or unjustified. The reference is answered accordingly against the revenue. No costs. - - Ta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
