Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2007 (7) TMI 255

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....94, passed in I.T.A. No. 870(ASR)/1989 in respect of assessment year 1984-85. The Tribunal has referred the following question of law for determination of this Court:- "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that there was only prima facie case against the assessee and net complete detection of expenditure and as such the case of the assessee was covered under the Amnesty Scheme and allowing consequential relief to the assessee by directing the decision of interest charged under section 139(8)/215?" 2. The assessee is an individual having income from salary, share from the firm and income from other sources. He filed his return on 31.10.1984 for the assessment year 1984-85 d....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....1985, declaring income of Rs. 6,22,970/- increasing the income of Rs. 40/- as declared in the earlier return filed on 31.10.1984. Thereafter there was announcement of an Amnesty Scheme by the Government of India for making disclosure w.e.f. 15.11.1985, which was widely published in various meetings held by the officers of the Income-tax Department with various Traders Associations, Chambers of Commerce etc. 4. In pursuance to the Amnesty Scheme, the assessee revised his return further on 25.3.1986 by surrendering an amount of Rs. 80,730/- on account of the alleged difference in the expenditure incurred at Taj Hotel, Delhi and paid a sum of Rs. 54,493/- as income-tax as per the revised return on the amount surrendered. The assessee also h....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....has not fully disclosed the expenditure in connection with the marriage of his daughter incurred by him at Hotel Taj Mahal, New Delhi. The word 'detection' has not been defined in the Income-tax Act, 1961. Dictionary meaning of the word 'detection' is discovery of something hidden or not easily observed'; state of being found out". From the above it is clear that detection is a process which is to be followed up step by step by patient enquiry or probe. Now in the present case admittedly some steps were taken by the Survey Party in finding out certain Bills allegedly issued by Hotel Taj Mahal, New Delhi in the name of the assessee, which indicated a large amount of expenditure having been incurred by the assessee in relation to the funct....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....before the assessee. 16. The scope of Amnesty Scheme under the Wealth-tax Act was considered by the Tribunal in the case of WTO vs.  Nand Kumar Pd. Shah in WTA Nos. 49 to 55/(PAT) of 1991 relating to Assessment years 1976-77 to 1982-83 as reported in (1992) 41 ITD 406 wherein it is held that the Amnesty Scheme was intended to encourage a defaulting assessee to come forward to pay tax and have a clear slate without being penalised for defaults…. The words suo moto and expression 'detection' by the department' were used relating to cases of penalties under section 18(1)(c) to convey that benefit of Scheme would be available when concealment or suppression of assets would be discovered through raids or other efforts of the departm....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....heme, because prosecution under section 276C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 is launched even for an attempt to evade tax and not for evasion of tax. 20. Thus keeping in view the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that the departmental authorities were not justified in charging interest under section 139(8) and 215 in relation to the unexplained expenditure incurred on the marriage of daughter of the assessee, which was surrendered by the assessee by filing a revised return during the period covered by Amnesty Scheme. Accordingly, the interest charged under section 139(8) and under section 215 is directed to be deleted." 5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties at a considerable length and are o....