1980 (8) TMI 3

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ion to section 271 (1) (c) are not applicable to this case ? " The Commissioner of Income-tax had sought for referring three questions. But, the Tribunal referred only one question. Subsequently, the Commissioner moved this court in C. P. No. 18 of 1976 for, directing further questions to be referred to this court. An order was made by this court dated December 1, 1976, in C. P. No. 18 of 1976 and, pursuant to that order, the following question has also been referred for the opinion of this court : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in cancelling the penalty of Rs. 5 lakhs levied under section 271 (1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?" As both the references arise out of the same orde....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ffairs, namely, that the transaction was a loan transaction. In view of the addition made, the Income-tax Officer was of the opinion that the assessee had concealed its income or furnished inaccurate particulars thereof and, therefore, initiated proceedings for imposition of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. On the ground that the minimum penalty imposable would exceed Rs. 1,000, he referred the matter to the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner. He, after affording an opportunity to the assessee to show cause why penalty should not be imposed, did not accept the contention of the assessee that the amount did not represent any income and that, therefore, there was no question of concealing any income or furnishing inaccurate particu....