JUDGMENT R.K. Gulati, J.
1. This is an application under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which pertains to the assessment year 1982-83. By this application, the Commissioner of Income-tax desired that the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal may be directed to state the case for the opinion of this court on the question set out in this application which is said to be a question of law. The question raised is as under :
"Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was, in law, justified in holding that there could not be said to be an attempt on the part of the assessee to conceal the income and, therefore, the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) was not leviable in this case?"
2. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we are not satisfied that the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal gives rise to any question of law. A penalty under Section 271(1)(c) was imposed on the ground that the respondent-assessee had omitted to declare certain property income in his return. The explanation of the assessee was that the omission was made on account of confusion, for in the earlier years, the property income in question was inadvertently included in the hands of the bigger Hindu undivided family and the Department had all along accepted that position. It was under that notion that the property income could not be included in the return for the year in question as well. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has accepted the bona fides of the assessee's explanation.
3. Whether there was concealment of income or income was omitted to be included inadvertently, is essentially a question of fact. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has accepted the explanation furnished by the assessee which the Tribunal was competent to do. We do not think that the Tribunal has committed any error of law in reaching this conclusion.
4. The application is without any substance and is accordingly rejected. The respondent-assessee is entitled to costs which we assess at Rs. 150.