| Case ID |
ff03eecd-f501-405e-8eec-cb5ab8af5bd9 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
MISC. IT REFERENCE No. 394 OF 1966 |
| Decision Date |
Apr 08, 1971 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The Tribunal held that the department did not provide sufficient evidence to prove that the amount of Rs. 9,45,000 represented the income of the assessee. The rejection of the assessee's explanation as false does not automatically imply that the disputed amount is taxable income. The Tribunal justified its decision to delete the penalty imposed by the Income-tax Officer, highlighting that the finding of fact regarding the income was not conclusive and lacked clarity. The court affirmed that without clear evidence of concealment of income, the penalty cannot be upheld. |
| Summary |
In the case of Commissioner of Income Tax v. Raja Mohd. Amir Ahmad Khan, the Allahabad High Court addressed the issue of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, relating to concealment of income. The case revolves around the assessment year 1942-43, where the Income-tax Officer (ITO) initiated proceedings concerning a sum of Rs. 9,45,000 credited to the assessee's account. The assessee claimed that this amount was derived from gujara income accumulated by his mother and grandmother. The ITO dismissed this explanation and assessed the amount as income from other sources, leading to a penalty of Rs. 2 lakhs. The Tribunal later ruled that the department failed to substantiate the claim that the amount constituted taxable income, ultimately leading to the deletion of the penalty. This case underscores the necessity for the department to provide robust evidence in penalty proceedings and illustrates that a mere rejection of an explanation does not suffice to infer income concealment. Key trends in tax law and the principles of reasonable doubt were pivotal in the court's decision, making this case significant for tax practitioners and those involved in income tax litigation. |
| Court |
Allahabad High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
S.N. Dwivedi,
Gopi Nath
|
| Lawyers |
Gopal Behari for the Applicant,
B.L. Gupta for the Respondent,
Ashok Gupta for the Respondent
|
| Petitioners |
Commissioner of Income Tax
|
| Respondents |
Raja Mohd. Amir Ahmad Khan
|
| Citations |
1975 SLD 689,
(1975) 100 ITR 433
|
| Other Citations |
CIT v. Anwar Ali [1970] 76 ITR 696 (SC),
CIT v. Indian Woollen Textile Mills [1964] 51 ITR 291 (SC),
CIT v. Ved Nath Singh [1940] 8 ITR 222 (Rang.) (FB),
CIT v. Sree Meenakshi Mills Ltd. [1957] 31 ITR 28 (SC),
G. Venkataswami Naidu & Co. v. CIT [1959] 35 ITR 594 (SC)
|
| Laws Involved |
Income-tax Act, 1961,
Indian Income-tax Act, 1922
|
| Sections |
271(1)(c),
28(1)(c)
|