The Patna High Court in the case of CIT v. Kailash Crockery House (107TAX386) held that furnishing inaccurate particulars of income perse would not warrant imposition of penalty unless it is found to be lacking in bonafide. In this case the Tribunal sustained the trading addition. In appeal before the Tribunal against the penalty order the Tribunal did not found any finding of concealment in the order of assessment. Against a reference at the instance of the revenue the Court held that no question of law arises after the Tribunal, who is a fact finding body, having come to the conclusion that the assessee did not furnish inaccurate particulars of income.
Log In
