1984 (9) TMI 15

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... may be levied was such as to vitiate the validity of the penalty proceedings under s. 271 (1)(c) ? The question has arisen because the assessee who had declared an income of Rs. 1, 16,490 was assessed by the Income-tax Officer on an income of Rs. 1,64,212 which was reduced in appeal to Rs. 1,46,490. According to the Department, the assessee had certain concealed income which can be determined from the fact that household expenses had been underestimated and travelling expenses of family and club expenses as well as medical expenses which had been reimbursed had not been shown properly. This is what has led to the addition made to the returned income. This was followed by penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) which led to an ord....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nt; either of the income or of the particulars-thereof. In order to enable such penalty to be imposed, it is necessary to determine which is the income concealed or which are the particulars not disclosed. It is on this aspect of the question that the Tribunal held that the jurisdictional fact necessary to constitute an offence had not been disclosed. The Tribunal stated in the order as follows : " At this stage, it would also be relevant to note that in the instant case, penalty was imposed by the ITO not regarding any particular receipt as such but only on the footing that the household expenditure was estimated by the ITO at Rs. 35,000 (the said estimate having been reduced by the Tribunal to Rs. 24,000) and the withdrawals by the ass....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r the Department to prove positively that there was such a concealment. In such a case, it becomes the duty of the Department to inform the assessee of the particular concealment that had taken place so that he could defend the case. This has led to the cancellation of the penalty order both by the Commissioner as well as the Tribunal which has merely affirmed the Commissioner's order. It was contended by Mr. Wazir Singh that the proper course in such a case was to remand the case for re-decision. We would not like to say anything on this matter because if the principles governing quasicriminal matters are applied, there are some cases in which a re-trial can be ordered and others in which the trial has to be set aside completely. As to ....