1980 (7) TMI 61

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....l dispose of Income-tax Cases Nos. 7 & 8 of 1976 as common questions of law and fact are involved therein. The assessee is a transport company. For paying passenger tax, the assessee-company used to purchase stamps in bulk. For the assessment years 1966-67 and 1968-69, the assessee-company disclosed its receipts as under : Rs. 1966-67 11,88,665 1968-69 13,33,003 The ITO found that t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ssessee-company submitted that the challans were prepared and handled by the clerks and these clerks had purchased more stamps than the quantity which was actually required by the assessee-company and they had sold the excess stamps to the other bus owners. The ITO rejected this explanation and made the following additions to, the receipts declared by the assessee-company keeping in view the ratio....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....AC had imposed a penalty of Rs. 15,000 on the assessee-company with regard to the concealment of income for the year 1966-67 and a penalty of Rs. 50,000 with regard to the concealment of income for the year 1968-69. The appeals filed by the assessee-company before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal were allowed and the penalties were waived. The Commissioner of Income-tax filed an application befor....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t normally insist that penalty be imposed on an assessee on the ground that its explanation had been rejected. But the additional evidence to be collected should be direct evidence or circumstantial evidence. We are purposely refraining from expressing any opinion on this point. The learned counsel for the revenue has submitted that even under pure criminal law the burden of proving that the case ....