COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. JASWANT RAI.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE are three applications (ITCs Nos. 61, 65 and 66 of 1991) filed under s. 256(2) of the IT Act, 1961 (for short the Act), seeking a direction to the Tribunal to refer a similar question of law in each application for opinion of this High Court. The question sought to be referred in each of the aforesaid three applications is common though these three petitions relate to three different assessees but for the same assessment year. The question relates to the leviability of penalty under s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. The amount of penalty in each case is different. The following question of law has been sought to be referred in ITC No. 61 of 1991 (in the case of Shri Jaswant Rai for the asst. yr. 1984 -85) :

(2.) THE assessee, Jaswant Rai, was a partner with one -third share in the partnership -firm M/s Miri Ram Prem Chand and with 15 per cent share in the partnership -firm M/s Raunaq Ram Om Parkash. Thus, he derived income mainly from his share as a partner in those two firms. Return of income was filed for the asst. yr. 1984 -85 showing total income at Rs. 12,560. The accounting year of the assessee ended on 31st March, 1984. A search and seizure operation took place at the residential premises of the assessee Jaswant Rai on 28th July, 1984. Certain documents were seized. The assessee filed replies explaining those documents. He, however, agreed for certain additions as under : <FRM>JUDGEMENT_138_LAWS(P&H)10_1996.htm</FRM>

(3.) SHRI R. P. Sawhney, learned senior counsel for the CIT, has contended that the concealment of income was apparent and, since the penalty has been cancelled, a question of law does arise.