B.S.DHILLON, J. - (1.) IN this petition under s. 256(2) of the IT Act, 1961, the CIT Patiala-I, Patiala, has approached this Court with the prayer that Tribunal Chandigarh Bench be directed to refer the following question of law for the opinion of this Court: "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that penalty under s. 271 (1)(c) was not exigible"?
(2.) THE assessee is a retired Civil Surgeon. For the asst. yr. 1969-70 he filed a return of iIncome on 13th Aug., 1969, declaring an income of Rs. 3061 In this return he showed income from Employees State Insurance at Rs. 8,738 University fees at Rs. 216, interest at Rs. 50 and income from dividends at Rs. 22. After claiming expenses of about Rs. 6,000, the net income was worked out at Rs. 3,061. No income from private practice was, however, shown in his return. The Department, however, found that the assessee was carrying on private practice. Thereafter, the assessee was required to prepare an income and expenditure statement which was filed by him on 29th Aug., 1970, in which the assessee declared income from private practice at Rs. 886 Consequently, revised return was filed by him on 29th Aug., 1970, declaring total income at Rs. 14,403 During the course of assessment proceedings, the ITO noticed that the assessee had made a gift of Rs. 10,000 to his son on 25th June, 1968. The assessee having failed to explain the source of the gift, the ITO made an addition of Rs. 4,000 to the income of the assessee taking it to be the amount representing his income from undisclosed sources. Accordingly an assessment was made on 21st Sept., 1970, on the total income of Rs. 19,401. The assessee challenged the order of the ITO in appeal. The AAC reduced the total income by Rs. 1,745. No appeal was filed by the assessee thereafter.
(3.) AT the time of completing the assessment, the penalty proceedings under s. 271 (1)(c) of the Act were also initiated by the ITO. The ITO referred the matter to the IAC who imposed upon the assessee a penalty of Rs. 8,475 under s. 271 (1)(c) of the Act. The assessee filed an appeal which was accepted by the Tribunal. The Revenue approached the Tribunal to refer the above mentioned question of law to this Court for it opinion and the Tribunal having refused to do so, the Revenue has approached this Court for issuing necessary directions.;