2013 (9) TMI 681

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....-93. 3. The appeal has been preferred by the department on substantial question of law as follows:- "1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble Tribunal was justified in law in deleting the penalty of Rs.5,00,000/- imposed by the AO u/s 271 (1) (c) of the Act and confirmed by the ld. CIT (Appeals)-II, Kanpur without appreciating that the surrender made on a/c of undisclosed income for A.Y. 1992-93 during the course of search and seizure operation conducted on 17.10.1994, was made much after the due date of filing of return of income u/s 139 (1) of the Act as well as after completion of original assessment proceedings u/s 143 (3) of the Act on 24.03.1994, and therefore, the act of concealment was completed fo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....osed income of financial year 1991-92 and accepted to pay tax on the same. Paragraph 6 and relevant para 6.1 are quoted:- "6. We have considered the submissions of both the parties and carefully gone through the materials available on record. In the instant case it is not in dispute that statement of the assessee was recorded during the course of search and in the said statement the assessee surrendered the amount which is clear from the answer to the question No.10 which the learned CIT (A) has reproduced at page No.2 of the impugned order. The said question and answer read as under: Q. No.10 : In reply to question No.7, you have told that the investment is out of business income and now you are saying that the same is out of yourself an....