TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Penalties Valid for Default in Original Assessment: High Court Decision Clarifies Income-tax Act</h1> <h3>K.C. MUKHERJEE AND ANOTHER Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BIHAR & ORISSA</h3> The High Court upheld the validity of penalties imposed on the assessees under section 28 of the Income-tax Act. It ruled that penalties could be levied ... - Issues:1. Validity of penalties imposed under section 34 proceedings.2. Interpretation of section 28 of the Income-tax Act.Detailed Analysis:Issue 1: Validity of penalties imposed under section 34 proceedingsThe case involved two assessees who were partners in a firm and had made substantial investments in private limited companies. The Income-tax Officer issued notices under section 34 for escaped income assessment. The assessees contended that penalties imposed were not valid as there was no concealment in section 34 proceedings. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal upheld the penalties. The High Court held that section 34 proceedings are not separate from the original assessment proceedings. The Income-tax Officer can levy penalties under section 28(1) even if the default occurred in the original assessment proceedings, as long as it relates to the same period and assessee. The court rejected the argument that penalties could only be imposed for defaults in section 34 proceedings.Issue 2: Interpretation of section 28 of the Income-tax ActThe High Court analyzed section 28 of the Income-tax Act, which allows penalties for concealment of income. The court emphasized that the phrase 'in the course of any proceedings' in section 28 governs the satisfaction of the Income-tax Officer, not just the default by the assessee. The court cited a decision by the Madras High Court to support the view that penalties can be imposed under section 28 even if the default occurred in a prior proceeding. The court disagreed with a decision by the Allahabad High Court, favoring the interpretation from the Madras High Court decision.Conclusion:The High Court held that the penalties imposed on the assessees under section 28 of the Income-tax Act were legally valid. The court answered the question of law in favor of the Income-tax Department and ordered the assesses to pay the costs of the reference. Both judges, Ramaswami, C.J., and Kanhaiya Singh, J., agreed on the decision, and the reference was answered accordingly.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
