G MANOHARAN Vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this appeal filed by the assessee under Section 260 A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, (hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for short), the following questions of law are raised:

(2.) We heard Advocate Sri. S. Gopakumaran Nair, the learned Counsel appearing for the appellant and Sr. Advocate Sri. P.K. Raveendranatha Menon, the learned Counsel who represented the Revenue.

(3.) The assessee derives income from a partnership firm namely M/s. Das Wines and Liquors and also income from his proprietary business as a Government Contractor besides income from other sources. Even though he had filed separate returns showing separate permanent account numbers for different sources of income, he had not declared his income from the aforementioned partnership business for the assessment year 1985-86. The assessing officer, therefore, initiated penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act for furnishing inaccurate particulars of his income. Since the explanation offered by the assessee was not acceptable, the Assessing Officer imposed penalty of Rs. 1,18,052/-. The assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Trivandrum. As per Annexure IV order dated 8-5-1991 the Commissioner allowed the appeal by cancelling the penalty order for the reason that the assessee officer had not taken prior approval of the Range Deputy Commissioner before passing the penalty order as enjoined by Section 274(2)(b) of the Act. An appeal preferred by the Revenue before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench as I.T.A. 506/Coch/92 was allowed and the matter was remanded to the Assessing Officer with a direction to pass fresh orders for obtaining the approval of the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax. It is the said order which is assailed in this appeal by the assessee.