Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2016 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (9) TMI 1648 - AT - Income TaxLevy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - unexplained cash deposits - CIT(Appeals) not admitting additional evidences as submitted before him - AO concluded that assessee failed to prove identity, credit worthiness and genuineness of the transaction and held that assessee has willfully concealed the particulars of income - HELD THAT:- CIT(Appeals) did not accept additional evidences which are in the shape of confirmations with their addresses, copies of bills and PAN etc. Merely because additional evidences were not admitted in quantum proceedings, is no ground to reject request of the assessee for admission of additional evidence in penalty proceedings which are independent and different proceedings. Since the additional evidences are relevant and required to be looked into in the penalty proceedings, therefore, ld. CIT(Appeals) should have admitted the additional evidences for the purpose of hearing. See Jorawar Singh case [2016 (7) TMI 1672 - ITAT CHANDIGARH] We set aside the order of ld. CIT(Appeals) in refusing to admit additional evidences. These additional evidences being relevant, shall have to be looked into in order to decide whether assessee is liable for penalty - Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
|