TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2008 (9) TMI 175
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... ITR 148 (SC)? (2) Whether the Tribunal erred in holding that the contracts with the sister concerns were sham transactions? (3) Whether the Tribunal erred in holding that the appellant had diverted its income to sister concerns? (4) Whether the Tribunal erred in applying section 6 of the Indian Evidence Act when the assessee had filed its return in a statutory form as required? (5) Whether the Tribunal erred in confirming the Commissioner's order for one charge when the penalty order was for another charge and the show-cause notice was for still another charge? (6) Whether the Tribunal erred in holding that Explanation 1 to section 271(1)(c) was applicable in this case? (6A) Whether the Tribunal erred in holding that the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e assessee carried the matter in successive appeals before the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Tribunal but did not succeed. The Tribunal's order in quantum proceedings was brought before this court by way of Income-tax Reference No. 220 of 1989 wherein the following question of law was raised. "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in finding that tax was avoided without ascertaining whether there is any revenue loss on account of non-inclusion of the income in question in the assessee's assessment and its inclusion in the assessment of the sister concerns?" 6. The High Court, vide its judgment rendered on July 14, 2003, answered the question in the affirmative, i.e., in favour of th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... sustained under section 271(1)(c). In our considered opinion, the plea based on the concept of double taxation suffers from an inherent infirmity inasmuch as it proceeds on the erroneous presumption that the Revenue is debarred from assessing the income belonging to the assessee in the hands of the assessee on the ground that the said income has been declared by another person and the same has been assessed by the Assessing Officer. It is well established by various judicial pronouncements of the hon'ble Supreme Court as well as the other High Courts that when an assessee shows certain income in his return, the Revenue does not act inconsistently if it accepts the return of that assessee on its face value and at the same time tax that inco....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to hold that income is liable to be taxed in the hands of the right person regardless of whether the same income has been declared and taxed in the hands of a different person. In so far as assessment proceedings are concerned, there can be no dispute with the aforesaid proposition. 11. However, when the issue is raised in penalty proceedings the factum of the very same income having been offered for tax by different entity and having been taxed substantially in the hands of other entity becomes a relevant factor for determining whether the assessee has concealed the said income or furnished inaccurate particulars regarding the said income which has already been taxed after being shown in the hands of different entity, namely, other than....