TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1973 (4) TMI 43
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Income-tax Act, 1922, made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, and the following question has been referred for our opinion : "Whether, upon the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that a penalty under section 28(1)(c) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, was attracted to this case ?" The dispute relates to the assessment for the year ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sable income was enhanced. On appeal to the Tribunal, the enhancement made by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner was deleted, but the order of the Income-tax Officer was upheld. The Income-tax Officer, thereafter, initiated proceedings under section 28(1)(c) of the Act. The assessee gave a written explanation to the notice on February 10, 1959, but the Income-tax Officer did not agree with the e....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to 1947. It also relied upon the finding given in the quantum appeal that misleading information was given, namely, that the assessee did not want to mix up the zamindari income with the amount received from his relations while he had in fact done so. Following the decision of this court in the case of Lalchand Gopal Das v. Commissioner of Income-tax, it held that a penalty was leviable in respect....