TMI Blog2013 (2) TMI 291X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pta and Tarun Kumar Das, JJ. Appellants Rep by: Mr Ranjan Sinha, Adv. Md Nizamuddin, Adv. Respondents Rep by: Mr N.K. Poddar, Sr. Adv. Mr V. Tibrewal, Adv. JUDGEMENT Per: Court: 1. This appeal is directed against a judgment and order dated 27th May, 2009 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata Bench upholding the decision of CIT (Appeal) that the Assessees are entitled to the benefit of immunity arising out of Explanation-5 to Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act and the penalty levied by the Assessment Officer was unjustified. Aggrieved by the judgment and order of the Tribunal, the Revenue has come up in appeal. 2. Mr. Sinha, learned Advocate appearing in support of the appeal submitted that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ontemplated by the aforesaid clause of the Explanation was duly made in course of the search. The statement made by the Assessee is on the record and has also been referred to by the Tribunal in Paragraph-4 of the judgment. As a matter of fact, the relevant part of the statement made by the Assessee has been quoted by the Tribunal from which it appears that the disclosure was made and recorded in question and answer form. 5. The manner in which the income was derived has also been disclosed and the assessee has thereafter paid the tax and the applicable interest. Mr.Poddar, therefore, submitted that all the requirements for operation of the clause of Explanation-5 quoted above were fulfilled. Therefore, the Tribunal had no option but to a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ut by Mr. Poddar, has taken into consideration all the judgments on this subject. But the judgment in the case of G.Kanhaialal was not taken into consideration. Mr.Poddar also drew our attention to the judgement in the case of Union of India Vs. Dharmendra Textiles Processors and Others reported in (2008) 306 ITR 277 (SC). He pointed out that this was a judgment with regard to penal provisions of the Excise Act and, therefore, had no manner of application and the point for decision was whether penalty could be imposed without an element of mens rea. He inter alia submitted that this judgment has no manner of application. The point which was arose for decision before the Tribunal or before this court was not even remotely touched by the afor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
