Case Details

Citation(s)
2001 SLG 512 2001 SLD 512 2001 PTD 3317 (1999) 240 ITR 477
Calcutta High Court
Income-tax Reference No. 107 of 1994, decision dated: 18-08-1999
R., JAYASIMHA BABU AND N. V. BALASUBRAMANIAN, JJ
N.K. Poddar, Senior Advocate, P. Ganguly and M.K. Mukherjee for the Assessee

BORMAH JAN TEA CO. (1936) LTD.

VS

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Law: Income Tax Act, 1961

Section: 271,271(1)(a),273,273(2)(a),139,139(8)

Income-tax----Amnesty scheme---Benefits under scheme available only in respect of income not offered for taxation---Excessive deduction claimed in original return---Deduction as per provisions of Act claimed in revised return--­Consequent additional income was entitled to benefits of Amnesty Scheme--­Entire income shown in revised return was not entitled to benefit of Amnesty Scheme. The assessee filed a return for the assessment year 1985-86 in November, 1985, declaring a total income of Rs.11,69,100. Thereafter, the assessee filed a revised return on September 12, 1986, declaring a total income of Rs.11,77,590. The difference represented an increase of the income by Rs. 8,488. The assessee claimed that the revised return filed voluntarily disclosing higher income came within the Amnesty Scheme. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment and also initiated penalty proceeding under section 271(1)(a) and section 273(2)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. According to the Income-tax Officer, the increase in the income in the revised return was a result of statutory disallowance and re-calculation of depreciation under the Income-tax Rules and hence, no higher income had been shown by the assessee in the revised return and that, therefore, it could not get the benefit of Amnesty Scheme. The Tribunal confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer. On reference: Held, (i) that the benefit of the Amnesty Scheme can be extended only to the escaped income. "Income escaped" means the income which has not been offered to tax. In the instant case in the original return the assessee had claimed excessive deductions which were not permissible under the Act. But, in the revised return, it had claimed the deductions as per the provisions of the Act. Therefore, to the extent, the income of the assessee could be treated as income escaped, but the benefit of the Amnesty Scheme could not be extended to the entire income disclosed in the revised return as it was neither concealed income- nor undisclosed income. Accordingly only the additional income of Rs.8,488 was covered by the Amnesty, Scheme. (ii) that the assessee was entitled for the benefit of the Amnesty Scheme, that is,…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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