1986 (9) TMI 76

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....red to this court for its opinion by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that section 274(2) is procedural and not substantive thereby confirming the penalties imposed by the Income-tax Officer for the assessment years 1966-67 to 1969-70 ?" The facts in a nutshell for deciding the afo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ment of the Act, namely, April 1, 1971. The case of the assessee was that since the original returns were filed prior to April 1, 1971, the amendment of section 274(2) of the Act which was in the nature of a procedural provision had no bearing on the case of the assessee and it is that law which was applicable at the time when the original returns were filed which would apply to the facts of the i....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....fect from April 1, 1971, in the Income-tax Officer and the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner was divested of this jurisdiction. The matter came up for consideration before Division Bench of this court in CIT v. Om Sons [1979] 116 ITR 215. It was, after construing the provisions of section 274(2) of the Act as amended by the Amendment Act of 1970, held that if on the date when the Inspecting Assist....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nalty proceedings finalised by a particular officer notwithstanding the fact that the jurisdiction of that officer has by a statutory provision been taken away before final orders could be passed in the penalty proceedings. Counsel for the assessee placed reliance on a decision of the Supreme Court in Brij Mohan v. CIT [1979] 120 ITR 1. Suffice it to say that, so far as this case is concerned, ....