2015 (1) TMI 1163

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... appeal of the revenue on the ground of it being below the limits of tax limits prescribed for filing the appeal contrary to the fact that the actual tax effect alongwith interest and surcharge would be more than Rs. 1 lac?" 3. The facts in brief which give rise to this Appeal are as under:- The assessee is a proprietary concern and is carrying on business in trading of Cement, Cement Sheet etc. During the year under consideration, the assessee had declared gross sales @ Rs. 39,53,732/= which included sale of glazed tiles of Rs. 56,250/-, and declared gross profit @ Rs. 95,911/- which is 2.42% as against last years sales which was of Rs. 35,63,792/- and gross profit disclosed was Rs. 80,597/- which was 2.26%. During the course of asse....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... had not submitted any written submission nor attended personally, therefore, it was presumed that the assessee had nothing to say in the matter and the loss purchased to the tune of Rs. 26,958/- by suppression of sales without any reasons added back to the income of the assessee. Penalty proceedings u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act was separately initiated for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. INTRODUCTION OF Rs. 1,70,000/- IN CAPITAL ACCOUNT:- During the course of assessment proceedings and on verification of capital account of the proprietor, it showed introduction of new capital of Rs. 40,000/- on 27.10.2000, Rs. 1,00,000/- on 08.11.2000 and Rs. 30,000/- on 30.11.2000. The assessee was asked to submit the source of introduction....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....02, i.e. 17.03.2004, the Tax Limit prescribed was Rs. 1,00,000/-. 5. In above view of the matter, here, it would be relevant to refer to the decision of the Apex Court in CIT vs. Khoday Eshwarsa and Sons reported in [1972] 83 ITR 369, wherein, in an unnumbered para, the Apex Court observed and held as under:- "From the above it is clear that penalty being proceedings being penal in character, the department must establish that the receipt of the amount in dispute constitutes income of assessee. Apart from falsity of explanation given by the assessee department must have before it before levying penalty cogent material or evidence from which it could be inferred that assessee has consciously concealed particulars of his income or had d....