TMI Blog1975 (7) TMI 30X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ained for that purpose. The assessee did not have a stock account to record the supplies sent through the vans nor did it have a manufacturing account or a stock register for the issue of raw materials. The van salesman remitted monies periodically. In the relevant year, the Income-tax Officer noticed that on a number of occasions, the cash balances with the van salesman was not sufficient to make remittances recorded in the books. On April 15, 1961, the cash available was Rs. 207 while the amount remitted was Rs. 5,000. Similarly, on June 11, 1961, the cash available was Rs. 10,706 while the remittance was Rs. 12,820. There were similar remittances on other occasions also. The assessee explained that these excess remittances came to be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessee appealed against this order of penalty to the Tribunal and submitted that there was no concealment warranting an application of section 271 of the Act. The Tribunal was not fully satisfied that this was a clear case of concealment of income. At the worst, in the view of the Tribunal, this was a borderline case where the assessee should be given the benefit of doubt. The explanation offered by the assessee in regard to the excess remittances was not found acceptable and an assessment was made rejecting the explanation. If the assessee had any deliberate intention of suppressing the turnover to the extent of Rs. 34,352, the Tribunal considered that the assessee would not have resorted to the method of excess remittances. The Tribunal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e are unable to accept them. Apart from the explanation which was given by the assessee regarding these excess remittances and which was not found acceptable, there is no other material available to show that there was any concealment of amounts by these van salesmen which has been accounted for. It is true that the assessment proceedings would constitute evidence for the purpose of penalty proceedings. But, neither in the assessment proceedings nor in the penalty proceedings is there any material to show that there was actual suppression of sales so as to justify the inference that the assessee had concealed particulars of his income. As we are not satisfied that a deliberate suppression of income has been made in the present case, we cons ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
