2005 (7) TMI 294

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....here the return was filed on22nd Feb., 2001. The notice under s. 148 had been issued subsequently on26th Feb., 2001and the returns filed earlier were regularised by the AO under s. 148. The assessments were completed in all these cases on28th March, 2001. It is pertinent to note that the assessee had claimed exemption under s. 10(5B) of the IT Act, 1961, and the said claim was accepted which resulted in assessment of lesser income than the declared income. For example, in ITA No. 5185 the declared income was Rs. 9,45,704 but the assessment was completed on the total income of Rs. 7,15,670. Similar is the position in other appeals as the amount of declared income and assessed income is different but in all cases the assessed income is less t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed, we are in agreement with such contention inasmuch as there cannot be any concealment where the entire income has been declared by the assessee in the original return. In the present case, it is admittedly clear that the entire income of the assessee was declared and on the contrary, the assessment was framed on a lesser income. Therefore, in our opinion, there was no concealment of income. This issue was also considered by the Tribunal on a Bench in the case of Yashwant B. Chigteri vs. Asstt. CIT (2001) 70 TTJ (Pune) 242 : (2000) 75 ITD 377 (Pune) to which one of us (JM) was party. The Bench, after following the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of Brij Mohan vs. CIT (1979) 12 CTR (SC) 198 : (1979) 120 ITR 1 (SC), judgment of Madras....