- (1.) AT the instance of the Revenue, the Income -tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question for the opinion of the High Court : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner had no jurisdiction to levy the impugned penalties ?'
(2.) THE facts relevant are these : The assessee was a registered firm. For the assessment year 1972 -73, the assessment was completed on November 15, 1973, by the Income -tax Officer. At the time of completing the assessment, the Income -tax Officer initiated penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Income -tax Act, 1961, read with the Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 1975 (Act No. 41 of 1975). Since the minimum penalty leviable exceeded rupees one thousand, the Income -tax Officer referred the matter to the Inspection Assistant Commissioner who imposed penalty under section 271(1)(c) on July 8, 1976. In respect of the assessment year 1973 -74, the return was filed by the assessee -firms. The Income -tax Officer completed the assessment on November 17, 1973. At the time of completing the assessment, he initiated penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Income -tax Act. Since the minimum penalty leviable exceeded rupees one thousand, the matter was referred to the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner.
(3.) IN both the matters, the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner imposed penalty under section 271(1)(c). On the assessee taking up the matter before the Tribunal, the order of the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner had no jurisdiction to impose penalty after April 1, 1976, when the Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 1975, came into force.;