TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1990 (7) TMI 137
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....follows: "Income as per original return of income Rs. 31,253 Add : Shares income in the relevant trusts are included which are with us and as per assessment orders received, remaining and not received per the list as the A.Os. The same may please be included, if includible. The letter is already given on 15-3-1984 Rs. 23,825 Total income Rs. 55,078" The assessment was completed at a total income of Rs. 2,44,150 which included the share income allocable to the minor children from the said trust. The ITO issued a show-cause notice why penalty for concealment of income should not be levied. The assessee Inter alia, replied that (1) he had no ill-intention to evade tax since in the case of the relevant trust the tax was pai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Trusts before 30-6-1981 Tax on total income Rs. 2,87,781 vide statement of column - 6 Tax allocable to 4 minors Rs. 1,03,559 vide statement column - 11 (3) If income of 4 minors would have been shown by K.C. Patel position would be : . . Income as per return Rs. 31,253 . Add; Income of 4 minors in Trusts Rs.1,51,641 Vide statement column - 5 Total income 1,82,894 . Tax payable 97,835 . Less: Already paid by him 5,720 . He would have to pay Rs. 92,115 . Tax paid by Trust allocable to 4 minors Rs. 1,03,559 Vide statement column - 11 Difference refundable Rs. 11,444 . He had no intention to evade tax as more tax to the extent of Rs. 11,444 has be....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ded on the basis that the minors' income from the trust has not been included in the assessee's income in the original return and so there was concealment and imposed the penalty. 5. The learned Departmental Representative while submitting that the penalty was imposed for ensuring that correct returns were filed, had relied upon the observations of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. R. Ochhavlal & Co. (1976) 105 ITR 518 (Guj) at page 528 which are as follows: "The main object of s. 271 is to see that correct returns are filed within the stipulated time and that necessary particulars of income are revealed. For the purpose of s. 271 it is not material whether as a result of the revelation of correct and accurate part....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....al liability would be impossible; and in that case, no penalty is leviable but that does not mean that penal liability under the first part of subs-. (1) was not incurred by that assessee. Impossibility of quantifying penal liability would not obliterate the fact that the assessee had rendered himself liable to a penal action. It is, therefore, a mistake to say that if there is no tax liability and if, consequent to that, quantification of penal liability is not possible, there was never any penal liability incurred by the assessee". 7. It can be seen that the observations on which the learned Departmental Representative has relied are in connection with the above observations that the liability exists independently of the quantification....