| Case ID |
21044bfe-6a80-4e56-9846-3ba25a31df04 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
IT REFERENCE No. 592 OF 1968 |
| Decision Date |
Dec 23, 1971 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The court upheld the validity of the penalty proceedings initiated against the assessee for concealment of income. It was established that the Income-tax Officer's (ITO) satisfaction regarding the concealment was necessary before penalty proceedings could commence. The court concluded that the ITO was entitled to initiate penalty proceedings even after the assessment was completed, provided there was a prima facie satisfaction recorded during the assessment. The decision emphasized that the initiation of penalty proceedings does not necessarily have to occur before the conclusion of the assessment, thereby validating the actions taken by the ITO in this case. |
| Summary |
This case involves the interpretation of sections 271 and 275 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 concerning the imposition of penalties for concealment of income. The Allahabad High Court examined whether the Income-tax Officer (ITO) could validly commence penalty proceedings after the assessment had concluded. The case arose when the ITO imposed a penalty on Bankey Lal Hira Lal for concealing income represented by cash credit entries. The tribunal initially struck down the penalty, arguing that proceedings were not initiated during the assessment phase. However, the High Court clarified that as long as the ITO had recorded satisfaction regarding the concealment during the assessment, the penalty proceedings could be validly initiated post-assessment. This decision underscores the importance of the ITO's satisfaction and highlights the procedural nuances of penalty imposition under the Income-tax Act. The ruling serves as a precedent for future cases involving similar legal questions, reinforcing the principle that the timing of penalty initiation is flexible as long as proper procedural requirements are met. |
| Court |
Allahabad High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
R.S. Pathak,
C.S.P. Singh
|
| Lawyers |
Dr. R.R. Misra,
Gopal Behari
|
| Petitioners |
Commissioner of Income-tax
|
| Respondents |
Bankey Lal Hira Lal
|
| Citations |
1973 SLD 672,
(1973) 92 ITR 587
|
| Other Citations |
D.M. Manasvi v. CIT [1969] 72 ITR 17 (Guj.),
Shakti Off-set Works v. IAC of Income-tax [1967] 64 ITR 637 (Bom.),
CIT v. Angidi Chettiar [1962] 44 ITR 739 (SC),
Durga Timber Works v. CIT [1971] 79 ITR 63 (Delhi),
Navayuga Traders Gunnies Firm v. CIT [1971] 79 ITR 519 (AP),
Padgilwar Bros. v. CIT [1971] 81 ITR 258 (Bom.-Nag.)
|
| Laws Involved |
Income-tax Act, 1961
|
| Sections |
271(1)(c),
275
|