1980 (4) TMI 216

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the tune of Rs. 5,000 in the name of Shri Rajendrakumar Tulsidas Shah. The ITO did not accept the credit as genuine and proceeded to treat the same from undisclosed sources. In the course of penal proceedings, the assessee explained that the creditor had confirmed the deposit and that the Tribunal sustained the addition to the extent of Rs. 2,000 only for want of evidence in respect of turmeric business done by Shri Rajendrakumar. Dissatisfied with the explanation the ITO imposed a penalty of Rs. 1,100 under s. 271(1)(c). As against this order of the ITO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the AAC. The AAC has restricted the quantum from Rs. 5,000 to Rs. 2,000 in view of the fact that the Tribunal in the quantum appeal filed by the as....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y concealed the particulars in respect of the same and that the disputed amount is a revenue receipt. No doubt, the original assessment proceedings for computing the tax may be a good item of evidence in penalty proceedings, the penalty cannot be levied solely on the basis of the reasons given in the original assessment order. So according to the ld. Deptl. Rep. the assessee has given explanation that he has received a sum of Rs. 5,000 from Shri Rajendra T. Shah and the same was confirmed by the depositor who was examined by the ITO on oath. The Tribunal has rejected the contention of the assessee with regards to Rs. 2,000 only on the ground that the explanation now given by the assessee is not plausible but doubtful. As the assessee has gi....