9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (12) TMI 844X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... th Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was passed on 31.12.2007 determining the total income of Rs. 1,71,92,686/- as against the total income of Rs. 1,47,08,820/- admitted by the assessee, taking into account the following four additions:- "(i) Unexplained investment and expenditure to the tune of Rs. 1,33,11,147/- (ii) Deemed dividend (iii) Unexplained investment in bank account (iv) Rs. 6,48,950/- which was shown as an agricultural income was treated as income from undisclosed source." The additions made in the said assessment order were accepted and the tax was also paid. Thereafter, the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax sought to initiate penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act, for which a notice was s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ad not imposed any penalty at the first instance in respect of the addition of Rs. 1,50,000/- towards deemed dividend and there was no deferment, the impugned order imposing penalty was bad. Having regard to the said plea raised by the assessee, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) finally held as follows:- "6. .....As regards the penalty in respect of addition of agricultural income is concerned, it may be stated that similar issue had come up for consideration in appellant's own case for A.Y.2001-02 in ITA No.206/10-11. After considering the facts of the case, submission of the Ld.AR, the decisions relied on by the appellant and after detailed discussion, the issue was decided in favour of the appellant in ITA No.206/10-11 dated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nts have been completed under section 147 r.w.s.153C r.w.s. 153A of the "Act". The ld. representatives also state that since there is no explanations offered by the assessee in any of the penalty proceedings, the facts are similar to those in I.T.A.Nos.2298 & 2294/Mds/2012 (supra) decided hereinabove. 13. We have considered the fair submissions advanced by both parties and gone through all case files. In these cases as well, since the assessee has not offered any explanation in penalty proceedings, we rely in the case law of CIT v. Mak Data Ltd. (supra) and confirm the orders under challenge passed by the CIT(A)." Challenging the above order, the present tax case appeal has been filed. 4. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
