R.L. Segel, Judicial Member - (1.) THESE appeals by the assessee, Ram Gopal Neotia of Calcutta, an individual, directed against four different orders of the IAC, Range VII, Calcutta, each dated 31-3-1977 under Section 271(1)(c), levying penalties of Rs. 2,600 for the assessment year 1958-59, Rs. 5,279 for the assessment year 1959-60, Rs. 2,304 for the assessment year 1960-61 and Rs. 3,189 for the assessment year 1961-62, for having concealed the particulars of his income or furnishing inaccurate particulars thereof for each of the said years, have been consolidated, heard together and are being disposed of by a common order for the sake of convenience. As already stated, the years of assessment involved are 1958-59, 1959-60, 1960-61 and 1961-62 for which the respective previous years ended 31-3-1958, 31-3-1959, 31-3-1960 and 31-3-1961.
(2.) The admitted facts in the present appeals and/or found by us are that on the returns originally filed by the assessee for the years under consideration, the ITO completed the assessment as detailed below : JUDGEMENT_6501_TLIT0_19810.htm Later on, the ITO came to know that certain loans which had been accepted by him as genuine in the aforesaid assessments of the assessee were bogus. He, accordingly, reopened the assessments of the assessee for the aforesaid four years under Section 147(a). The reassessments for the first three years were completed under Section 144/147(a). The details about the dates of the issuance of the notice under Section 148/147(a) and their service on the assessee and the total income assessed for those three years under Section 144/147(a) are as under : JUDGEMENT_6501_TLIT0_19811.htm
(3.) IN the appeals filed by the assessee against these reassessments, in so far as the accounting period relevant to the assessment year 1958-59 is concerned, the AAC, Range I, Calcutta, vide his order dated 27-6-1974, set aside the said reassessments in order to enable the ITO to make a fresh assessment giving effect to the terms of the settlement reached between the assessee and the department to which we will be making a reference in a latter part of this order by observing as under : The learned representative of the appellant has filed before me a copy of the settlement petition reached with the department covering the assessment years 1958-59 to 1967-68 in terms of which the department and the assessee will pray for setting aside the order pending before the appellate authorities, in order to give effect to the terms of the settlement. The appellant, accordingly, prays that this assessment be set aside. Coming to the accounting period relevant to the assessment year 1959-60, we find that application of the assessee under Section 146 to set aside the ex parte assessment of the assessee for that year was rejected by the ITO. Thereafter, the assessee had filed an appeal before the AAC challenging the correctness of the order of the ITO rejecting the said application under Section 146. This appeal of the assessee as also the appeal of his against the quantum of total income determined in the reassessment under Section 144/147(a) was dismissed by the AAC. Against those orders, the assessee brought the matter by way of appeals before the Tribunal (Calcutta Bench 'C') bearing IT Appeal Nos. 1012 (Cal.) of 1973-74 and 4750 (Cal.) of 1972-1973 decided on 4-7-1974. The Tribunal in the said order has brought out the settlement between the assessee and the department referred to above and then cancelled the ex parte assessment made against the assessee under Section 144/147(a) and directed the ITO to make fresh assessment in accordance with law after giving the assessee a reasonable opportunity for adducing of evidence in support of his case because the assessee's authorised representative and the departmental representative have agreed before us that we have to pass orders in these appeals giving effect to the aforementioned terms in this settlement. As a corollary to the order just mentioned hereinbefore, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee against the order of the AAC confirming the ex parte assessment. The best judgment assessment of the assessee under Section 144/147(a), accounting period relevant to the assessment year 1960-61, was cancelled by the ITO by allowing the application of the assessee under Section 146 vide his order dated 18-7-1973.;