1971 (3) TMI 33

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ion of a penalty under section 28(1)(c) of the Act lies upon the revenue ? (3) Whether the conditions requisite for the imposition of a penalty under section 28(1)(c) of the Act should be established beyond reasonable doubt? (4) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal rightly held that none of the two conditions requisite for the imposition of a penalty under section 28(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1922, was satisfactorily established in either of the two years under reference ?" The assessment years under consideration are the years 1955-56 and 1957-58, the relevant previous years being the years ending March 31, 1955, and March 31, 1957, respectively. The assessee is a Hindu undivided family ca....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ax Act, 1922, in respect of each of the two assessment years mentioned above. The assessee attempted the same explanation as had been adduced by it during the assessment proceedings and with the same result. The Income-tax Officer levied a penalty of Rs. 4,500 for the year 1955-56 and a penalty of Rs. 1,200 for the assessment year 1957-58. The assessee appealed against the penalty orders. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax reduced the amount of penalty in the two cases. Thereafter, the assessee appealed to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal, holding that the burden of proof lay upon the department to establish that the assessee had wilfully or deliberately concealed its income in relation to the two assessment y....