SIDHIVINAYAK CHEMICALS P LTD Vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
LAWS(IT)-1994-10-19
INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Decided on October 14,1994

Appellant
VERSUS
Respondents

JUDGEMENT

K.C. Singhal, Judicial Member - (1.) THESE are two appeals by the assessee against the order of the CIT(A) Bombay pertaining to assessment years 1983-84 and 1984-85. In both the appeals, the facts and issue involved being common, for the sake of convenience both the appeals are being decided by this common order.
(2.) The issue involved in both the appeals is in respect of levy of penalty under Section 271 (1)(c) for concealment of particulars of income. The facts in both the appeals are identical. The assessee is a private limited company which had filed returns of income for assessment years 1983-84 and 1984-85 declaring loss of Rs. 12,320 and Rs. 2,51,090 respectively on 27-3-1986. As per the balance sheet filed along with the return, there was increase in the share capital and loans from unsecured creditors. The increase in share capital was Rs. 2,24,000 and Rs. 2,54,000 while in respect of unsecured loans it was Rs. 15,973 and Rs. 1,21,000 in respect of assessment years 1983-84 and 1984-85 respectively. But no details were filed by the assessee in respect of such increase. The Assessing Officer in the course of assessment proceedings asked the assessee to furnish details in respect of these cash credits. In spite of various opportunities given to the assessee, it did not produce any details whatsoever before the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer therefore made exparte assessment on 23-3-1987 and assessed the receipt by way of increase in share capital and unsecured loans as income from undisclosed sources. The penalty proceedings under Section 271 (1)(c) were also initiated in respect of these additions by the Assessing Officer while completing the assessment proceedings. As appeal was filed by the assessee before the CIT(A) who also confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer vide his order dated 17-8-1990 as according to him the assessee did not even file any evidence before him. He also held that the assessee has not even discharged the primary onus of disclosing the basic material facts which lay upon it.
(3.) AN application for rectification under Section 154 was filed by the assessee before the CIT(A) wherein it was stated that details of unsecured loans and share capital had been given to the CIT(A) as per assessee's letters dated 14-10-1987 and 30-11-1987, The CIT(A) perused the record and dismissed the application of the assessee filed under Section 154 vide order dated 6-5-1991 holding that though the list of shareholders and unsecured creditors along with their addresses and GIR Nos. had been filed by the assessee yet these could not be held as evidence to prove the cash creditors.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.