1983 (6) TMI 69

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....name of Bhavnesh Kumar on the ground that the assessee had failed to prove the nature and source of those cash credits as also on account of addition of Rs. 10,183 to the gross profit returned. Prior to the completion of the assessment, the ITO had issued notice to the assessee as to why penalty be not levied against it under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'). 3. After the cause was shown and the assessee was heard, the ITO, vide his order dated23-3-1979, was satisfied that the assessee had committed the offence under section 271(1)(c) and penalty was exigible against the assessee under that provision. The ITO then went on to levy a penalty of Rs. 2,454 by observing that "Minimum penalty and maximum penalty comes ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y way of appeal before the AAC who has cancelled the penalty order of the ITO dated23-3-1979as also his order under section 154 by observing as under : " Though original order under section 271(1)(c) was not challenged it is claimed that since order under section 154 modified the order under section 271(1)(c) appellant can take it to its ambit the original order under section 271(1)(c) also. Appellant has objected to both the above orders on the ground that the penalty order both in its original order and after section 154 are void ab initio. It is claimed that for assessment year 1975-76 the penalty under section 271(1)(c) was in relation to income concealed. The calculation of penalty as done by the Income-tax Officer on the basis of t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ental representative, the original penalty order passed by the ITO on 23-3-1979 having been not appealed against by the assessee had become final between the ITO and the assessee not only regarding his (ITO's) finding regarding the commission of the offence under section 271(1)(c) but also regarding the quantum of the penalty leviable subject to the right of the ITO to rectify the same under section 154. Since there was no application by the assessee regarding the existence of any mistake apparent on the record in the matter of the finding of the ITO in the original penalty order, dated 23-3-1979, regarding the commission of the offence by the assessee under section 271(1)(c) for the year under consideration, the finding of the ITO in this ....