SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1996 Supreme(Mad) 37

N.V.BALASUBRAMANIAN, K.A.THANIKKACHALAM
Commissioner of Income Tax – Appellant
Versus
J. V. Appadurai Chettiar Company – Respondent


Appearing Advocates: For

Judgment :-

THANIKKACHALAM J.

In compliance with the directions of this court in T. C. P. No. 224 of 1979, the Tribunal referred the following question for the opinion of this court under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act").

"Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessee had not furnished inaccurate particulars of the income in the original return filed on March 17, 1972, and accordingly in deleting the penalty of Rs. 10, 000 imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Act ?"

The assessee is a registered-firm doing business in jaggery at Vellore. On March 17, 1972, for the assessment year 1971-72, the assessee filed a return, disclosing the business income of Rs. 64, 234. In the course of examination of the accounts, the Income-tax Officer found that there was a credit for Rs. 10, 000 in the name of one Sri Gopal Mudaliar. The assessee filed a confirmatory letter from Gopal Mudaliar in support of the loan of Rs. 10, 000 taken from him. In the course of the enquiries made by the Income-tax Inspector, Gopal Mudaliar denied having advanced any loan to the assessee. The





Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top