Penalty after reassessment upheld where close-proximity timing sufficed and wilful suppression of turnover justified levy.

In penalty proceedings following reassessment, simultaneity requires only close proximity between the reassessment order and the penalty order; it does not require both orders to be made on the same date. On the facts, the penalty orders were passed soon after reassessment and were therefore not invalid on that ground. The finding that the assessee wilfully put wrong totals in the accounts, causing suppression of turnover and reduced disclosure to avoid tax, provided a valid basis for penalty. The Tribunal's view that such conduct justified levy of penalty was upheld, and the penalty remained undisturbed.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the penalty order was invalid for want of simultaneity with the reassessment order; and (ii) whether the finding of wilful wrong totalling and suppression of turnover justified levy of penalty.

Issue (i): whether the penalty order was invalid for want of simultaneity with the reassessment order.

Analysis: The principle of simultaneity does not require that both orders be made on the same date. What is required is that the penalty order should be passed in close proximity to the reassessment order. In the present cases, the penalty orders were made soon after the reassessment orders.

Conclusion: The penalty orders were not vitiated on the ground of lack of simultaneity.

Issue (ii): whether the finding of wilful wrong totalling and suppression of turnover justified levy of penalty.

Analysis: The authorities found, on inspection and on the material before them, that the assessee had wilfully put a wrong total in the entries, resulting in suppression of turnover and reduced disclosure with a view to avoid tax. The Tribunal affirmed that such conduct furnished a valid basis for penalty.

Conclusion: The levy of penalty was justified and no error of law was shown in the Tribunal's decision.

Final Conclusion: Both challenges failed and the revisions were dismissed, leaving the penalty undisturbed.

Ratio Decidendi: For penalty proceedings following reassessment, simultaneity means close proximity and not identity of date, and a finding of wilful suppression of turnover is sufficient to sustain penalty.

---