2001 (7) TMI 67

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....3 of 1983, the following question has been referred for the opinion of this court under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short "the Act"): "(1) Whether, on the facts and in-the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that penalty was exigible in this case? (2) When the learned Inspecting Assistant Commissioner had imposed penalty under the substantive provi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ssessing Officer determined the total income at Rs.1,57,514. It included addition of Rs.49,985 on the ground that the commission claimed to have been paid to sub-agents was not substantiated. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner (in short, "the AAC") in appeal reduced the total income by Rs.6,000 and out of this deduction of Rs.5,000 related to the commission paid to one person, Ravinder Malik. Th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....pheld by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. The matter was carried in appeal before the Tribunal by the assessee. Having noted all the factual aspects, the Tribunal came to hold that the commission claimed to have been paid to J. Mohan was not justified and the claim was untenable. With regard to the other sub-agents, the Tribunal took the view that in law the assessee could not have been said ....