| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1967 SLG 423 1967 SLD 423 (1967) 65 ITR 280 |
Bombay High Court
IT REFERENCE No. 45 OF 1962, FEBRUARY 22, 1967
KOTVAL, C.J. AND V.S. DESAI, J.
S.P. Mehta, Y.P. Trivedi, V.H. Patil and I.M. Munim for the Applicant. G.N. Joshi and R.J. Joshi for the
Respondent
IT REFERENCE No. 45 OF 1962, FEBRUARY 22, 1967
KOTVAL, C.J. AND V.S. DESAI, J.
S.P. Mehta, Y.P. Trivedi, V.H. Patil and I.M. Munim for the Applicant. G.N. Joshi and R.J. Joshi for the
Respondent
D.M. Dahanukar
VS
Commissioner of IncomE tax
Law:
Section:
Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [Corresponding to Section 28(1)(c) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922] - Penalty - F or concealment of income - Assessment year 1954-55 - Whether mere fact that amount omitted was large and substantial would not be sufficient to draw an inference that omission was deliberate or due to lack of bona fides on part of assessee - Held, yes - Assessee held ordinary and preference shares in various companies - Upto and including assessment year 1954-55 he included dividend income from those companies on actual payment basis, which were accepted by department - However assessee having learned that dividend income was to be included in year of return in which it was declared, included divided declared by a company in relevant period in return of assessment year 1955-56 - Dividend amount included in assessment year 1955-56 being a large amount ITO examined said return on 13-6-1956 and questioned assessee why such dividends were not disclosed in previous assessment years - On 25-6-1956 assessee filed revised return for assessment year 1954-55 including certain dividend income which were not included by him on wrong impression that it was to be returned on actual payment basis - However Tribunal held that assessee had concealed income for assessment year 1954-55 and imposed penalty - Whether since conduct of assessee being consistent with hypothesis that he had not deliberation intention to conceal income or to furnish inaccurate particulars thereof, it could not be said that there was any intention on his part to conceal income and evade imposition of tax thereon Held, yes - Whether, moreover, in view of fact that there was no evidence on record in support of conclusion arrived at by Tribunal that assessee had concealed the particulars of his income or deliberately furnish inaccurate particulars thereof so as to make himself liable for the imposition of a penalty under section 28 of the Act, 1922, penalty so imposed on him was liable to be deleted - Held, yes FACTS The assessee had held ordinary and preference shares in various companies. In the financial year 1953-54, dividends were declared by certain companies in which the…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492