TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 1358X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... MI 80 - SUPREME COURT] - The assessing authority made no enquiry but jumped to the conclusion of imposition of penalty on the basis of quantum addition sustained by the Appellate Tribunal - Even the satisfaction as envisaged by section 271(1B) of the Act is not discernable from the body of the assessment order - The explanation furnished by the assessee is found bona fide – thus, the penalty imposed is set aside – Decided in favour of Assessee. - IT Appeal No. 67 (JP.) of 2013 - - - Dated:- 4-4-2013 - B.R. JAIN, J. For the Appellant : Fazlur Rahman Khan and Mahendra Gargieya. For the Respondent : Ms. Roshanta Meena. ORDER:- This appeal by the assessee against the order dated November 30, 2012 of the learned Commissioner o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ubmitted that penalty is not leviable. The Assessing Officer did not find the explanation offered by the assessee to be satisfactory. He, therefore, held that the assessee has filed inaccurate particulars of income and concealed his income by Rs. 2,00,000. Therefore, he imposed penalty of Rs. 1,23,600 equal to 200 per cent. of the tax sought to be evaded. 3. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) took the position that the creditworthiness of Smt. Varsha Agarwal and Smt. Abha Agarwal, the donors of the gift and genuineness of the transaction has not been proved by the assessee as is evident from the Appellate Tribunal order on merits of the addition. He, therefore, treating the gifts as unexplained, held the assessee liable for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ee thus had given a plausible explanation and as such it could not be a case of levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act, that too to the extent of 200 per cent. of the tax sought to be evaded. The authorities below have also failed to establish that the explanation tendered by the assessee is false which is an essential requisite of section 271(1)(c) of the Act. The assessee has placed reliance on the judgment by the hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of CIT v. Balbir Singh [2008] 304 ITR 125 and also by the hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of National Textiles v. CIT [2001] 249 ITR 125. 5. On the other hand, the learned Departmental representative placed reliance on the findings and conclusion reached by t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
