COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. KAUSHALYA SMT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the order of the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner, imposing penalty for 1967 -68 was passed without giving the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the order of the Income -tax Officer imposing penalties for the assessment years 1968 -69 and 1969 -70 were passed without giving the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard ? (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the orders of the Income -tax Officer imposing penalties for the assessment years 1968 -69 and 1969 -70 were without jurisdiction ?' 1. The above three questions have been referred for the opinion of this court under section 256(1) of the Income -tax Act, 1961 ('the I.T. Act'), at the instance of the Commissioner of Income -tax, Vidarbha and Marathwada, Nagpur.

(2.) THE assessee (deceased Sampatprasad Tiwari) declared his income from the business of supply of coal and sand and a share in a firm as under : Assessment year Date of return Amount of income declaredRs.1967 -68 25 -8 -1967 6,4101968 -69 2 -1 -1969 16,4791969 -70 3 -7 -1969 15,772

(3.) THE Income -tax Officer even before making the order dated March 29, 1972, had referred the case to the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner for the assessment year 1967 -68 in the view that the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner had jurisdiction over the case for that year and the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner had issued a show -cause notice dated March 28, 1972, under section 274(2). For the assessment years 1968 -69 and 1969 -70 different show -cause notices were issued by the Income -tax Officer under section 274(2) after making the assessments vide order dated March 29, 1972. The Inspecting Assistant Commissioner imposed a penalty of Rs. 13,000 for the assessment year 1967 -68 and the Income -tax Officer imposed penalties of Rs. 22,000 and Rs. 10,000, respectively for the assessment years 1968 -69 and 1969 -70. Being aggrieved by these orders of penalty, the assessee filed appeals before the Tribunal and the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. By a common order dated October 19, 1973, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner upheld the penalties for the assessment years 1968 -69 and 1969 -70. Aggrieved thereby, the assessee filed two second appeals before the Tribunal. The Tribunal heard these two second appeals and the first appeal for the assessment year 1967 -68 together and disposed of them by two separate orders. All these three appeals were allowed and penalties were quashed.