TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1980 (6) TMI 67
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l, the ITO is claimed to have come into possession of some information, to the effect, that one Shri R.L. Goyal, operating in the trade name M/s Lachminarayan Atmaram confessed on solemn affirmation before the ITO on 16th Feb., 1971 as to having carried on bogus hawala transactions with the assessee. The assessment in the case of the assessee was accordingly, re-opened and reasonable satisfaction having not been reached by the ITO in the course of re-assessment proceedings as to the genuineness of the loan amount of Rs. 50,000 standing in the books of accounts maintained by the assessee for the assessment year under appeal, to the credit of the said Shri R.A. Goyal operating/under the trade name of M/s. Lachminarayan Atmaram, the amount of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e assessment proceedings did not by themselves clinch the matter, in the absence of failure on the part of the assessee to adduce arguments and evidence in support of his stand, the findings in the assessment proceedings would be decisive. He also held that in the present case, the assessee has stated on oath that it has had bogus hawala transactions with M/s. Niranjanlal Ratan Kumar to the extent of Rs. 50,000 introduced in the books for the year relevant to the assessment year under appeal and, accordingly, the IAC was of the view, that, nothing stated or represented in the course of the proceedings go to disprove the statement. 4. Holding, that the circumstances led to the positive conclusion that the amount represented the assessee's....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y under s. 271(1)(c) of the Act, inasmuch as the penalty proceedings are separate and distinct proceedings than that of assessment proceedings: thirdly, that this Bench of Tribunal vide orders dt. 20th May., 1980 made in ITA No. 347 (Gau) of 1979 relating to the assessment year under appeal in the case of the assessee has since cancelled the re-assessment proceedings, with the result that the impugned penalty order of the IAC becomes nest. 7. On his part, Shri B.N. Sarma Barthakur, the ld. Deptl. Rep., has supported the impugned order of the IAC. 8. We have given our due consideration to the facts of the case as also to the submissions made before us by the ld. Authorised Representative of the parties. We have also perused the impugne....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h the provisions of s. 274(2) relevant at the material time of making such references. The jurisdiction which had become vested in the IAC became terminated on the deletion of s. 274(2) and consequently the IAC had no jurisdiction to levy penalty in the instant case." 11. Respectfully following the reasoning and the conclusion arrived at by the said Full Bench, on the facts and in the circumstances of the present case in appeal before us, we do hold that the IAC has had no jurisdiction to levy penalty in the instant case. 12. The next contention raised on behalf of assessee is as to the onus, suffice it to say, that the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has since set the controversy at rest and we do usefully and respectfully, quote thei....