AJAY TEWARI, J. - (1.) THIS is an appeal filed by the appellant under s. 260A of the IT Act, 1961, against the order of the Tribunal dt. 29th "(1) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Tribunal is right in law and on fact in sustaining the levy of penalty on Rs. 6,50,433 against the deletion on total amount of Rs. 3,98,433 ? (2) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in sustaining the levy of penalty by applying and on true interpretation of the provisions of s. 68 ? (3) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, in case the provisions of s. 68 are held to be applicable to the present case whether the income accrues and arises in the year under assessment to be called its concealed income -
(2.) DEPARTMENT carried out search and seizure action under s. 132(1) of the IT Act, 1961 (for short "the Act"). During search certain books of account and several documents were found and seized, scrutiny whereof revealed earning of substantial income from liquor contracts. The assessee had not filed return of income for the asst. yr. 1986 -87. The AO ground that no AOP comprising of 11 persons was in existence during the asst. yr. 1986 -87. Even if such AOP existed, the ITO, CC, Patiala with whom the return was allegedly filed did not exercise any jurisdiction and, therefore, no proceedings in the case of AOP were pending with the ITO, CC, Patiala.
(3.) IT was held that the income disclosed of Rs. 15,63,163 in the return was on the basis of seized documents and, therefore, no complexity of investigation was Rs. 17,63,163. Thereafter, the AO took up assessment proceedings. The seized documents included balance sheets for various months. Apart from the profit earned and shown in the balance sheets, the same also indicated cash credits aggregating to Rs. 13,98,000 in the names of 11 persons.;