TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 1476X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der section 147, as discussed above, were carried out just to validate the invalid revised return and not on account of any detection of escapement of income. In view of the above, we do not find it as a case fit for levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c). The penalty so levied by the lower authorities is, therefore, ordered to be deleted. - Decided in favour of assessee. - I.T.A. Nos. 93 to 95/Mum/2012 - - - Dated:- 4-3-2015 - SHRI B. R. BASKARAN, AND SHRI SANJAY GARG, JJ. For the Appellant : Shri G. P. Mehta For the Respondent : Shri Love Kumar ORDER Sanjay Garg (Judicial Member).- The above titled appeals have been preferred by the different but related assessee's against the orders of the Commissioner of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d by the assessee in the revised return. Penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) were also initiated. The Assessing Officer (A.O.) noticed that a search action under section 132 of the Act was carried out at the firm M/s. R. K. Overseas, Amritsar and during the enquiries it was noticed that the said firm was a bogus firm operated on by one chartered accountant namely Shri Vivek Kapoor, and his employees. The assessee allegedly had shown to have received profits from the said firm. After the detection of the alleged bogus firms operated by the said Shri Vivek Kapoor, chartered accountant, the assessee declared the income of ₹ 74,69,150 in his time barred revised return. The Assessing Officer therefore held that the case of the asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... st the assessee either under section 153C of the Act or under section 147 of the Act pursuant to the said search action against the said chartered accountant. The assessee himself filed a revised return declaring an additional income which was claimed in the original return to have been received as share of profit from the firm M/s. R. K. Overseas. The reassessment under section 147(1) was done in this case subsequent to the filing of the revised return so that the additional income offered by the assessee may be validly assessed as the revised return was invalid being time barred. The present is not a case where any concealment of income was detected either during the original assessment proceedings or pursuant to any action of reassessmen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
