1996 (3) TMI 40

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....alty under section 271(1)(c) in this case, for the assessment year 1965-66 ?" For the assessment year 1965-66, the assessee filed a return on December 8, 1969, and the assessment was completed on March 20, 1970. Penalty proceedings for concealment of income in that return were initiated. But the original assessment completed on March 20, 1970, was set aside by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner on appeal. Then it was redone on November 13, 1972. Penalty proceedings were again initiated and a minimum penalty of Rs. 21,831 was levied by the Income-tax Officer. There was also a search in the premises of the assessee on October 18, 1973, when fixed deposit receipt for Rs. 10,000 was recovered. The deposit relates to the accounting year rel....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....or the Department submitted that the penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) were initiated after the reassessment was completed on July 22, 1974. Therefore, as per the law applicable as on that date as per the provisions of section 274(2) of the Act, the Income-tax Officer would have jurisdiction to levy penalty if the quantum of penalty is less than Rs. 25,000. In the present case, the penalty levied was only Rs. 10,000. Therefore, the penalty levied by the Income-tax Officer is in order and the Tribunal was not correct in stating that the penalty ought to have been levied by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner, since the levy of penalty of Rs. 10,000 was above Rs. 1,000 as per the law as it stood earlier to the amended provision....