2009 (2) TMI 422

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nt. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by C. N. Ramachandran Nair J.- Heard counsel for the appellant and standing counsel for the Department. 2. The question raised is whether the Tribunal was justified in sustaining the penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) and confirmed in first appeal.  The appellant was engaged in the business of running a theatre, bar hotel an....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....modified by the first appellate authority by directing levy of minimum penalty, against which the appellant filed an appeal which was dismissed by the Tribunal. 3. The contention raised by the appellant is that the Department has not established concealment of income and so much so penalty cannot be levied. This is against the settled position of law declared by the Supreme Court reported in K.....