Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2015 (7) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (7) TMI 333 - ITAT AHMEDABADPenalty u/s.271(1)(c) - non fulfilment of conditions u/s. 271AAA(2)(i) and manner of deriving of the impugned undisclosed income was neither specified nor substantiated in this case - CIT(A) deleted the addition - Held that:- It is evident that the assessee has attributed this undisclosed income to be on-money on sale of residential properties throughout. The CIT(A) holds that the Assessing Officer accepted the above stated source and undisclosed income in assessment framed without making any comment or observation. This case file comprises of the assessment order as well. The Revenue fails to refer to any such query being put up to the assessee doubting the source and manner of deriving of the impugned undisclosed income. We find that a coordinate bench in The D. CIT, Cent. Cir-3, Surat Versus Smt. Sulochanadevi A. Agarwal [2012 (12) TMI 21 - ITAT AHMEDABAD] has quoted the hon’ble jurisdictional high court decision in case of CIT vs. Mahindra C. Shah (2008 (2) TMI 32 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT) in holding that when an assessee admits undisclosed income in course of search, offers it to be taxed in the return, pays tax thereupon, no penalty can be levied particularly in the absence of any question being raised in respect thereof by the Assessing Officer. The Revenue fails to point out any exception to the same. It also does not rebut the CIT(A) crucial findings that the assessee had not been put to specific question specifying and substantiating the manner of having derived the impugned undisclosed income. - Decided against revenue.
|