1993 (11) TMI 6

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Department had failed to discharge its onus to prove concealed income on the basis of revised returns furnished by the assessee ? (2) Whether the Tribunal was right in law in holding that no penalty under section 271(1)(c) was to be levied in reference to the admitted concealed income in the revised return even though the concealed income was detected during search and settled with the Department after original return of income had been filed ? (3) Whether the Tribunal was right in law in inferring that levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) for concealed income is not to be considered with reference to original return of income though filed after its detection by the Assessing Officer ?" After hearing learned counsel on both sides, w....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ted the reassessment proceedings for the assessment year 1977-78 by adding a sum of Rs. 1,37,494 to its income. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment proceedings for the year 1979-80 by adding a sum of Rs. 2,33,708 to the income. The Income-tax Officer thus acted upon the abovereferred offer. However, penalty proceedings were initiated against the assessee as contemplated under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Apart from the said letter dated March 5, 1986, there was no other material whatsoever before the authorities on the basis of which it could be held that the assessee had concealed its income during the relevant years. However, the Income-tax Officer levied penalty on the assessee as set out in his order dated M....