2005 (3) TMI 86

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....and I.T.A. No. 1000/Ind/1993 to answer the following questions of law said to arise out of the aforementioned appellate orders: "1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in law in confirming the addition of Rs. 30,000 as concealed income of the assessee? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in justifying the levy of penalty of Rs. 18,000 under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961?" The dispute relates to the assessment year 1988-89 and it centres around a question as to whether the Assessing Officer, Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and the Tribunal were justified on their part in imposing and then upholding the addition....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....en disbelieved and the aid has been termed as an afterthought. The explanation offered and bona fide substantiated by the assessee has not been found false in the assessment proceedings. In short the explanation offered and substantiated by the assessee has been disbelieved/discharged and a sum of Rs. 30,000 has been assessed on account of alleged concealed income which does not ipso facto constitute concealed income of the assessee. The assessee has filed second appeal before the Tribunal challenging addition of Rs. 30,000." It is this explanation which did not find favour either with the Assessing Officer or with the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and lastly, with the Tribunal giving rise to the making of this reference by the Tr....