NDLI: Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Mussadilal Ram Bharose

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	Income Tax Act
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Act(s) Referred	Income Tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961)
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Dismissed
Headnote	Income Tax Act, 1961, s.271(1) (c)-Assessee-Concealment of ·particulars of his income or furnishing inaccurate particulars-Assessee - to prove that failure to file correct return of income did not arise from fraud, gross or wilful neglect to the satisfaction of assessing authority. The Income-tax Officer rejected the account books of the respondent-assessee on the ground that the sales and expenses were not verified and. the margin of profit shown was low. He adopted the net profit rate at 8% thereby computing the profit at Rs.60,800 and the total income was computed at Rs.60936 after addition of Rs. 136 for interest receipts. On appeal the Appellate Assistant Commissioner confirmed this order of the Income-tax Officer. As the total income returned was less than 80% of the correct income computed, he held that the case fell within the ambit of s.271( 1) of the Act, and issued a show cause notice under section 274 read with section 271 to the assessee. It was contended on behalf of the assessee before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner (i) that the assessee did not conceal the particulars of income nor furnish inaccurate particulars; (ii) that the income returned was based on the books of account maintained in the regular course of business; (iii) that the assessee could only declare the income as reflected in the books of account; (iv) that the difference between the returned income and the assessed income did not arise from any fraud or gross or unlawful neglect on the part of the assessee ; and (v) that it could not be considered in the circumstances that the assessee came within the mischief of s.27 (1) (c) of the Act. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner rejected these contentions, confirmed the order of the Income-tax Officer and in view of the Explanation to section 27 (1) (c) levied a penalty of Rs.8,300 under section 271(1) (c) read with section 274(2) of the Act.The respondent-assessee went up in appeal to the Tribunal which cancelled the penalty order and finally determined the income of the assessee at Rs.50,750 holding: (a) that the assessee had maintained certain types of books of account and had honestly believed that the same were sufficient for the true ascertainment of his profits and, from the facts he disclosed, it could not be said that he had been grossly or wilfully negligent in filing the return of income and as such there was no fraud; (b) that the difference between the income returned and the income assessed arose mainly on account of excess profit, in view of the various defects in the account books and the application of a higher profit rate on estimated turnover. The application of the appellant-revenue seeking reference under s.256( 2) of the Act, was rejected by the Tribunal on the ground that no question of law arose. The appellant-revenue went before the High Court under section 256(2) of the Act seeking a reference on the question of cancelling the penalty imposed under sec.27 (1)(c) of the Act, and this application was also dismissed on the ground that the finding of the Tribunal that the assessee acted honestly notwithstanding the defective nature of the account books maintained by him was a finding of fact and therefore no question of law arose.
Judge	Honble Mr. Justice Sabyasachi Mukherjee
Neutral Citation	1987 INSC 24
Petitioner	Commissioner Of Income Tax
Respondent	Mussadilal Ram Bharose
SCR	[1987] 2 S.C.R. 67
Judgement Date	1987-01-28
Case Number	2083

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Mussadilal Ram Bharose

Please Log-in to view this content

Baladin Ram Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, U.p.

Ram Bai Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

Commissioner of Income-tax, Kanpur Vs. Behari Lal Ram Charan Ltd.

Ram Pershad Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, New Delhi

Ram Kumar Agarwalla and Brothers Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Central, Calcutta

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Ram Kumar Aggarwal and Bros.

R. Dalmia Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

Aravinda Paramila Works Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

Poonjabhai Varmalidas Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Ahmedabad

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Mussadilal Ram Bharose

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Mussadilal Ram Bharose

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

Baladin Ram Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, U.p.

Ram Bai Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

Commissioner of Income-tax, Kanpur Vs. Behari Lal Ram Charan Ltd.

Ram Pershad Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, New Delhi

Ram Kumar Agarwalla and Brothers Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Central, Calcutta

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Ram Kumar Aggarwal and Bros.

R. Dalmia Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

Aravinda Paramila Works Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

Poonjabhai Varmalidas Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Ahmedabad

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Mussadilal Ram Bharose