1966 (6) TMI 2

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the assessee produced a statement on March 20, 1959. Thereafter, the Income-tax Officer, who issued the notice under section 28, stood transferred and his successor made an order on December 15, 1961, imposing a penalty of Rs. 30,000. Before he did so, he did not again hear the assessee. In the appeal presented to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, the assessee was able to get rid of the order made by the Income-tax Officer on the ground that the Income-tax Officer who succeeded to the Income-tax Officer who had issued the notice did not again hear the assessee. But in the appeal preferred by the Income-tax Officer to the Appellate Tribunal, the view taken by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner did not commend itself, with the result ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... statement in writing before the Income-tax Officer who stood transferred, and there was no oral representation made by the assessee. That is how we should understand what the Tribunal has stated in the course of its order in which it pointed out that the Tribunal was unable to find from the record anything to support the theory that there was some oral representation in addition to what was stated in writing. Mr. Chouta for the assessee asked us to say that the assessee did make an oral representation before the transferred Income-tax Officer and in support of this submission he asked attention to a communication addressed by the assessee to that Income-tax Officer on March 20, 1959. The difficulty which Mr. Chouta encounters in making th....