COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. SAJJAN SINGH MALIK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this petition under s. 256(2) of the IT Act, 1961, the CIT Patiala-I, Patiala, has approached this Court with the prayer that Tribunal Chandigarh Bench be directed to refer the following question of law for the opinion of this Court:

(2.) THE assessee is a retired Civil Surgeon. For the asst. yr. 1969-70 he filed a return of iIncome on 13th Aug., 1969, declaring an income of Rs. 3061 In this return he showed income from Employees State Insurance at Rs. 8,738 University fees at Rs. 216, interest at Rs. 50 and income from dividends at Rs. 22. After claiming expenses of about Rs. 6,000, the net income was worked out at Rs. 3,061. No income from private practice was, however, shown in his return. The Department, however, found that the assessee was carrying on private practice. Thereafter, the assessee was required to prepare an income and expenditure statement which was filed by him on 29th Aug., 1970, in which the assessee declared income from private practice at Rs. 886 Consequently, revised return was filed by him on 29th Aug., 1970, declaring total income at Rs. 14,403

(3.) AT the time of completing the assessment, the penalty proceedings under s. 271 (1)(c) of the Act were also initiated by the ITO. The ITO referred the matter to the IAC who imposed upon the assessee a penalty of Rs. 8,475 under s. 271 (1)(c) of the Act. The assessee filed an appeal which was accepted by the Tribunal. The Revenue approached the Tribunal to refer the above mentioned question of law to this Court for it opinion and the Tribunal having refused to do so, the Revenue has approached this Court for issuing necessary directions.