Court upholds profits addition for 1966-67, reduces for 1967-68. Penalties canceled; no income concealment found.

The court upheld the addition of Rs. 1,50,000 as profits for the assessment year 1966-67 and the reduced addition of Rs. 4,50,000 for the assessment year 1967-68. In the penalty proceedings, the court agreed with the Tribunal that there was no evidence of concealment of income by the assessee, leading to the cancellation of penalties for both assessment years. The court found that the income from permits did not reach the assessee, justifying the cancellation of penalties under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act.

---

---

Issues Involved: Assessment of undisclosed income, levy of penalty for concealment of income, interpretation of section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act.

Assessment Year 1966-67: The assessee, a registered firm, disclosed an income of Rs. 1,65,826, but the Income-tax Officer added Rs. 1,50,000 as profits from customs clearance permits obtained in the name of another concern. The court upheld the addition of Rs. 1,50,000 as the profits for this assessment year.

Assessment Year 1967-68: For this year, the assessee initially disclosed an income of Rs. 2,70,315, later revised to Rs. 3,67,960. The Income-tax Officer added Rs. 9,68,750 as profits from customs clearance permits obtained in the name of another concern. The Tribunal reduced the addition to Rs. 4,50,000. The court upheld this reduced addition for this assessment year.

Penalty Proceedings: The Tribunal, in considering the levy of penalty, found that while benefits may have accrued to the assessee from the permits for assessment purposes, there was insufficient evidence for the penalty. The Tribunal concluded that there was no evidence of concealment of income or that the money reached the assessee for its benefit. The court agreed with the Tribunal's findings, stating that the penalty was rightly cancelled as there was no concealment of income by the assessee. The court also noted that the Explanation to section 271(1)(c) was considered, and the levy of penalty was not justified based on the facts of the case.

Questions of Law: The Appellate Tribunal raised questions regarding the cancellation of penalties for both assessment years. The court affirmed the Tribunal's decision to cancel the penalties, citing the lack of positive evidence that the income from permits reached the assessee. The court answered the questions in favor of the assessee and against the Revenue, leading to the cancellation of penalties for both assessment years.

---