Court :
Supreme Court
Brief :
Where the Dept. is aggrieved by a finding of fact in a decision of the Tribunal, challenge to such finding must be specifically made before the High Court.
Where the Dept. solely rests on the voluntary disclosure of income and the same is accepted without linking it to conealed income, penalty shall not be levied.
Citation :
Yet to reprot in Magazines
1 http://www.itatonline.org
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 5204-5207 of 2002
PETITIONER:
Sudarshan Silks & Sarees
RESPONDENT:
Commissioner of Income Tax, Karnataka
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 11/04/2008
BENCH:
ASHOK BHAN & DALVEER BHANDARI
J U D G M E N T
CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 5204-5207 OF 2002
BHAN, J.
1. These appeals have been filed by the assessee against the final judgment
and order dated 6th October 2001 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at
Bangalore in ITRC Nos. 684/98, 685/98, 686/98 and 687/98 by which the
High Court while setting aside the order of assessment passed by the Income
Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short, 'the Tribunal') and that of the Commissioner
of Income Tax (Appeals), held that the facts and circumstances of the case
warranted levy of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961
(for short "the Act").
2. The assessment years involved in the present Appeals are 1984-85,
1985-86, 1986-87 and 1987-88. Facts:
3. A search was conducted on the premises of the assesses on 14th and
15th of October, 1987 and incriminating documents evidencing concealment of
income by the assessee were unearthed apart from cash and jewellery found at
the time of search. It was found that the appellant was maintaining double set
of books and was accounting for only 50% of sales in the regular set of books.
This fact was admitted by Shri J.S. Ramesh, a partner of the firm in the
statement recorded under Section 132(4) of the Act. Shri J.S. Ramesh is the
person-in-charge of the entire group. The total turn over suppressed by the
assessee for the assessment year 1987- 88 was found to be to the tune of
Rs.44,07,783/-.
These have been discussed in detail in the order of assessment. Assessing
Officer estimated that the sales of the assessee were Rs.50,000/- per day,
whereas the accounted sales were not found even 50% of the total sales. Apart
from this, it was found that certain purchases were also not being accounted
for. Similarly certain payments made were not being accounted for. All these
were pointed out to the assessee. The assessee came forward with offer of
CAclubindia
