TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1977 (2) TMI 7
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....me-tax Officer found two cash credits of Rs. 4,250 and Rs. 12,000 in the names of Banwarilal Agrawala and Tulsiram Agrawala, respectively. He did not accept the explanation of the assessee and added these amounts as income from other sources. The order of assessment was passed on October 17, 1970, and he directed a proceeding under seetion 271(1)(c) of the Act to be initiated. In due course, the penalty matter was referred to the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner of Sambalpur under section 274(2) of the Act. On January 24, 1973, the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner issued a notice to the petitioner fixing the matter to February 15, 1973, for hearing. On 12th of February 1973, counsel for the petitioner asked for an adjournment and the matt....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t jurisdiction of the Commissioner can be invoked only when the remedy of appeal is waived. Admittedly, the petitioner on waiver of his right of appeal had moved the Commissioner. Learned standing counsel concedes that there is no remedy open against the order of the Commissioner in exercise of revisional jurisdiction. Petitioner has come before this court asking for a writ of certiorari after the Commissioner disposed of the matter. The question of alternate remedy has to be examined with reference to the order of the Commissioner and not that of the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner. In view of the concession of learned standing counsel that there is no other remedy against the revisional order of the Commissioner, we find no force in the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed in clause (iii) of sub-section (1) of section 271, if in a case failing under clause (c) of that sub-section, the amount of income (as determined by the Income-tax Officer on assessment) in respect of which the particulars have been concealed or inaccurate particulars have been furnished exceeds a sum of twenty five thousand rupees, the Income-tax Officer shall refer the case to the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner who shall, for the purpose, have all the powers conferred under this Chapter for the imposition of penalty." The Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act of 1975 deleted sub-section (2) of section 274 with effect from 1st of April, 1976. It is thus clear that the Income-tax Officer had appropriately referred the matter of penalty to t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....resent case on two grounds, namely, (i) sub-section (2) having already been deleted, the law applicable may not be found to be as incorporated in the principal Act ; and (ii) the effect of section 6 of the General Clauses Act which had not been considered on the earlier occasion by this court vitiates the decision of the court and the matter, therefore, must be re-examined. Both these contentions do not impress us. The question for consideration is as to whether the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner had jurisdiction when he exercised it in the matter of imposition of penalty. The answer to the question would depend not upon what the law subsequently has been as a result of the amendment with effect from April 1, 1976, but by finding out wha....