Law:

Section:

2007] 293 ITR 384 [2008] 172 TAXMAN 212 (MAD.) HIGH COURT OF MADRAS Commissioner of Income-tax v. T.M. Abdul Azeez & Co.* P.D. DINAKARAN AND P.P.S. JANARTHANA RAJA, JJ. TAX CASE (APPEAL) NOS.1001 AND 1002 OF 2007â-  JULY 5, 2007 Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Penalty - For concealment of income - Assessment years 1997-98 and 1998-99 - In returns of income filed in response to notices under section 148, assessee offered certain additional income, being loan credits in names of certain persons - Revenue completed assessment and also levied penalty under section 271(1)(c) - Tribunal deleted penalty on ground that concealment had not been proved by authorities below - Whether reasons given by Tribunal were based on valid materials and evidence and, therefore, there was no error or illegality in its order so as to warrant interference - Held, yes FACTS The assessee had filed returns of income for the relevant assessment year. Subsequently, in response to the notices under section 148, it filed the returns offering certain additional income, being the loan credits in the names of certain persons. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment accepting the returns, but also levied the penalty under section 271(1)(c) on the ground that the assessee had failed to prove genuineness of loan credits. On second appeal, the Tribunal deleted the penalty holding that concealment was not proved by the revenue. On revenue's appeal : HELD The Tribunal had given a clear finding that the concealment had not been proved by the authorities below. The question whether there is a concealment or not is a question of fact. The finding given by the Tribunal was that the authorities below had failed to prove the concealment. Hence, the order of the Tribunal was not a perverse order. The reasons given by the Tribunal were based on valid materials and evidence and there was no error or legal infirmity in its order so as to warrant interference. No substantial question of law arose for consideration and, accordingly, the appeals were to be dismissed. CASE REFERRED TO T. Ashok Pai v. CIT [2007] 292 ITR 11/ 161 Taxman 340 (SC) [Para 6]. J. Naresh Kumar for 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