1984 (3) TMI 53

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.....-For the assessment year 1971-72, the case of the assessee was taken up on January 28, 1974. It was found by the ITO that the assessee had prima facie concealed an income of Rs. 40,000. On August 6, 1974, the ITO referred the case to the IAC, Ludhiana Range, Ludhiana, on the ground that he only had the jurisdiction to impose a penalty as the income concealed exceeded Rs. 25,000. The IAC accepted ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ion came up for consideration before a, Division Bench of this court in CIT v. Mela Ram Jagdish Raj & Co. [1981] 132 ITR 897. In that case, it was observed as under (p. 900) : " Shri Gupta, the learned counsel for the assessee, relies on the decisions of the Orissa High Court in CIT v. Dhadi Sahu [1976] 105 ITR 56 and Radheshyam Agarwalla v. CIT [1978] 113 ITR 196 and also that of the Allahabad....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ordships of the Supreme Court in Anant Gopal Sheorey v. State of Bombay, AIR 1958 SC 915, to hold that the procedural laws are retrospective. There is no dispute with this proposition, but the main question to be determined is as to whether the provisions of sub-s. (2) of s. 274 of the Act relate to procedure or to a question of jurisdiction. In our view, the moment penalty proceedings are initiat....