1996 (9) TMI 26

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ct, 1961, for the year 1967-68 on the ground of concealment of income relating to contract works ? Assessment year 1966-67 : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that penalty was liable to be imposed on the assessee under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the year 1966-67 on the ground of concealment of income relating to contract works ?" With regard to both the assessment years, returns were filed on June 26, 1968. It appears that for the assessment year 1967-68, Rs. 2,723 was shown as income liable to tax and for the assessment year 1966-67, it was shown as Rs. 3,692. Thereafter, it appears that on January 30, 1971, revised returns ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....planation dated February 13, 1973, in pursuance of the notice issued by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner. In the process, for the year 1966-67, a penalty of Rs. 20,000 was imposed and for the year 1967-68, a penalty of Rs. 30,500 was imposed. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was in seisin of the situation with regard to the assessment years. The Tribunal, by order dated August 27, 1975, held that for the assessment year 1966-67, a penalty could not be levied. However, with regard to the assessment year 1967-68, the penalty of Rs. 6,000 was sustained. Thus the matter came up before this court in CIT v. K. Mahim [1984] 149 ITR 737. This court considered the situation in I. T. R. Nos. 154 and 155 of 1979, at the instance of the Revenu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....usion is recorded to the following effect: "The correct income in relation to that source has now been fixed at Rs. 14,242. We are of the view that the correct income for the purpose of computation of penalty should be reckoned as Rs. 14,242, in the event of its being held that penalty is leviable." It was in this situation, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, was called upon to consider the questions reproduced at the outset. In paragraph 7 of the order of the Tribunal, with regard to the assessment year 1966-67, the submissions are considered by the Tribunal. Similarly, with regard to the assessment year 1967-68, the question is considered in paragraph 13 of the order of the Tribunal. In fact, reading the earlier jud....