COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. PADMA DEVI JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Revenue has filed this application under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for calling for a statement of the case from the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Indore Bench, on the following stated questions of law, arising out of the Tribunal's order dated August 29, 1997:

(2.) WHETHER, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in confirming cancellation of the penalty of Rs. 1,15,000 levied by the Assessing Officer under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act holding that there is no mens rea of the assessee to conceal the income or to furnish inaccurate particulars of income, although the statutory provisions relating to levy of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) do not have any such condition relating to mens rea ?

(3.) IT appears to us that the controversy involving use of the words "deliberate" and "mens rea" does not assume importance for purposes of deciding the fact of this application and any effort to dig deep into it would eventually turn out to be totally academic. This is so because the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and the Tribunal had in fact accepted the explanation of the assessee regarding the overcharged interest amount and her bona fides and had returned findings of fact in the facts and circumstances of the case that her return could not be branded false inviting imposition of penalty. Therefore, it becomes futile to examine whether or not any element of deliberateness or mens rea in the action of an assessee was a pre-requisite to be satisfied to invite penalty proceedings. Determination of this issue could await an appropriate proceeding". For the present, we do not feel inclined to call for the statement of the case on any of the questions stated above. This application is accordingly rejected.