TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1976 (8) TMI 56
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... not successful in concealment of his income as far as the assessment proceedings were concerned. But he seems to succeed in warding off a penalty for such concealment because the ITO who was quite vigilant to detect concealment was not so vigilant enough to make sure about his competency to punish the culprit. 2. As reads the fact of concealment we are quite sure and satisfied that there is co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the jurisdiction of the ITO to levy penalty that causes all the impediments in the case. It is by now well-settled that the law to the applied with regard to imposition of penalty for concealment is the law as it prevailed on the day (Unless it be procedural law) on which the concealment took place, i.e., the date on which the return was furnished and not the law as it stood on the first day of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... was punished by a person who has no authority to punish. 4. The submission of the Departmental Representative that the law as to who should impose penalty is only procedural in nature, that it is only the quantum of penalty that is substantive in nature and that, therefore, on the relevant date on which penalty proceedings were initiated or the ITO came to satisfy about concealment, he had and....