Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether penalty under section 15-A(1)(b) could be sustained solely on the basis of the finding recorded in the assessment proceedings, without independent evidence or surrounding circumstances establishing concealment or deliberate furnishing of inaccurate particulars.
Analysis: Penalty proceedings are independent of assessment proceedings and the burden lies on the department to establish the ingredients necessary for levy of penalty. A finding in assessment may be relevant and admissible, but it is not conclusive and can only operate as evidence when considered with other surrounding circumstances. The existence of concealment or deliberate suppression cannot be presumed merely because the assessment order disbelieves the accounts or because the assessee could not produce seized material before the revisional authority.
Conclusion: Penalty could not be levied in the absence of any circumstance or evidence other than the finding in the assessment proceedings; the issue was decided in favour of the assessee.
Ratio Decidendi: A finding in assessment proceedings, by itself, is not sufficient to justify penalty; independent evidence or other material circumstances must establish conscious concealment or deliberate furnishing of inaccurate particulars.