S.S.SODHI.J. - (1.) THE question of law referred for the opinion of this Court reads as under: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that when reference under sec. 274(2) r/w S. 271(1)(c) of the IT Act, 1961, had been made on November 25, 1975, the IAC was vested with valid jurisdiction for imposing penalty under S. 271 (1)(c) even when sub s. (2) of S. 274 came to be omitted from the statute book w.e.f. April 1, 1976?"
(2.) THE matter here arises in the context of the deletion of S. 274(2) of the IT Act, 1961, by the Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 1975, which came into effect from April 1, 1976. In the present case, the ITO completed the assessment on March 5, 1975, and thereafter made a reference to the IAC on November 25, 1975. As the conclusion of the ITO regarding concealment of income had been made before the Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 1975, came into force, the IAC cannot but be held to have been vested with the requisite jurisdiction at the relevant time. This position in law has also been laid down by this Court in IT Ref. No. 55 of 1981 [CIT vs. Prem Singh Deviditta Mal (1990) 87 CTR (P & H) 5: (1989) 177 ITR 236 (P & H)], decided on December 2, 1988. The reference is accordingly answered in the affirmative, in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. There will, however, be no order as to costs.;