Case Details

Citation(s)
2004 SLG 2841 2004 SLD 2841 (2004) 269 ITR 492
Kerala High Court
IT REFERENCE No. 263 OF 1997 JUNE 3, 2004
S. SANKARASUBBAN AND A.K. BASHEER, JJ.

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

Commissioner of IncomE tax

v.

T.J. Mathai, Contractor

Law:

Section:

Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Penalty - For concealment of income - Whether after coming into force of Explanation to section 271(1)(c), burden is on assessee to show that there was no concealment of any particulars of any income - Held, yes - Whether where Tribunal had not decided appeal in light of Explanation to section 271(1)(c), Tribunal was to be directed to consider matter in light of Explanation - Held, yes FACTS Various documents were seized during search proceedings conducted at the assessee's premises. The Assessing Officer made additions on account of income from contract works and from hiring out machinery. There-after, the Assessing Officer initiated penalty proceedings and after consi-dering the assessee's explanation, levied penalty on him. On appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) cancelled the penalty levied. On further appeal, the Tribunal upheld the cancellation of penalty and further held that since no notice was issued under the Explanation to section 271(1)(c), penalty proceedings could not be initiated. On reference : HELD After coming into force of the Explanation to section 271(1)(c), the burden is on the assessee to show that there was no concealment of any particulars of any income. [Para 6] Thus, in the instant case, the Tribunal was not correct in holding that the Explanation did not come into play. As per the Explanation, the burden is on the assessee. Therefore, the Tribunal should have decided the appeal in the light of the Explanation to section 271(1)(c). Since the Tribunal had not considered it in the proper perspective, the Tribunal was directed to consider the matter in the light of the aforesaid.[Para 7] CASES REFERRED TO K.P. Madhusudhanan v. CIT [2001] 251 ITR 99/ 118 Taxman 324 (SC) [Para 6] and CIT v. Warasat Hussain [1988] 171 ITR 405/[1987] 35 Taxman 227 (Pat.) [Para 6]. P.K.R. Menon and George K. George for the Applicant. C. Kochunny Nair and Dale P. Kurian for the Respondent. JUDGMENT S. Sankarasubban, J. - The above ITR has been referred to this Court by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench in R.A. No. 194/Coch/96. As per the reference, three questions of law are referred to this Court;…
🔒
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