2001 (10) TMI 76 - HC - Income Tax

Taxpayer's Assurance Doesn't Shield from Penalties for Concealment: Court Upholds Decision

Commissioner of Income Tax Versus Sudharshan Silks And Sarees.

Commissioner of Income Tax Versus Sudharshan Silks And Sarees. - [2002] 253 ITR 145, 171 CTR 256, 120 TAXMANN 152 Issues Involved:1. Assurance of No Penalty2. Lawfulness and Enforceability of Assurance3. Filing of Revised Returns and Concealment of IncomeSummary:1. Assurance of No Penalty:The court examined whether any assurance was extended to the assessees that no penalty would be levied if they filed revised returns. The Tribunal's conclusion that such an assurance 'must have been' given was deemed conjectural and unsupported by any record. The court emphasized that findings must be based on admissible material, not assumptions.2. Lawfulness and Enforceability of Assurance:The court found it unnecessary to examine whether such an assurance could be lawfully extended or enforced, as the Tribunal's finding of an assurance was unsustainable.3. Filing of Revised Returns and Concealment of Income:The court analyzed whether the filing of revised returns disclosing previously undisclosed turnovers constituted concealment warranting penalty u/s 271(1)(c). The revised returns were filed after search and seizure operations revealed large-scale concealment and a statement by a partner detailing the modus operandi. The court held that the revised returns were not bona fide but were filed under compulsion to pre-empt reopening of earlier assessments. Mere filing of revised returns does not exonerate the assessee from penalty if the returns are not filed in good faith. The court concluded that the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was not justified in cancelling the penalty levied on the assessees.Conclusion:The court answered the referred question in the negative, holding that the Tribunal was not justified in cancelling the penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c). The references were disposed of accordingly.