COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. DEORAO SHARAWAN MAUNDEKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a reference under S. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961, made at the instance of the Revenue. The questions that are posed read thus :

(2.) THE reference relates to the asst. year 1959 60. The assessment for this assessment year was completed on January 11, 1960, and the total income, was assessed at Rs. 6,517. In December 1964, a search at the assessee's business and residential premises yielded material which showed that income relating to the concerned assessment year had not been fully disclosed. The, assessment was thereupon reopened under S. 147 of the IT Act 1961, and a notice under S. 148 was served on the, assessee on March 28, 1967. On March 7, 1969, and May 13, 1969, the assessee filed return pursuant to the notice under S. 148 declaring his total income at Rs. 6,517 as assessed in the first instance. On August 5, 1969, the assessee filed at revised return declaring a total income of Rs. 18,120. The reassessment was made by an order dated February 24, 1970, determining the total income at R. 21,270. The assessment order stated :" Issue notice under s. 274 for the default under S. 271(1)(a) for late filing of return and S. 271(1)(c) for concealing the particulars of income." The ITO referred the case in regard to penalty to the IAC in view of the fact that the minimum penalty imposable was more than Rs. 1,000. By his order dated October 22, 1971, the IAC imposed a penalty upon the assessee in the sum of Rs. 17,500. The assessee carried the mater regarding penalty in appeal to the Tribunal. The Tribunal quashed the penalty .

(3.) UPON the findings of the Tribunal, the two questions that are posed arise and we heard Mr. Jetly, learned counsel for the Revenue, at length, upon both. Thereafter, Mr. Thakar, learned counsel for the respondent, argued the matter, in so far as it concerned the first question, at some length. He thereafter, pursuant to the discussion thereon, stated that the first question may be answered in the affirmative and in favour of the Revenue. The first question will, accordingly, be so answered.