COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. RITA MALHOTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WE have examined the order of the Tribunal and the order refusing an application under S. 256(1) of the IT Act. The question proposed by the Department was as follows :

(2.) THIS question is in ITC No. 84 of 1978. The same or similar questions are involved in the other four cases (ITCS. Nos. 85 to 88 of 1978) relating to four other assessment years.

(3.) THE Tribunal has stated that no question of law arises on the facts of the case. What happened was that the assessee had claimed a deduction from income -tax in money -lending business in respect of the premises in which she was carrying on money - lending business. She also happened to be living in the same premises and, accordingly, the ITO disallowed the whole amount claimed for the asst. year 1967 -68. The assessee appealed and went on making similar claims every year. The amount was disallowed every year in full but, on appeal, the AAC allowed a partial deduction and at the same time took action for concealment of income under S. 271(1)(c) and imposed a penalty. On appeal, the Tribunal struck down the penalty.