TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 1607X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f ld. CIT(A). Considering the aforesaid facts, we are of the view that ld. CIT(A) has rightly deleted the penalty and therefore we find no reason to interfere with the order of ld. CIT(A) and thus this ground of Revenue is dismissed. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No.1614/AHD/2011 - - - Dated:- 10-6-2015 - Shailendra Kr. Yadav, JM And Anil Chaturvedi, AM,JJ. For the Appellant : Smt Sonia Kumar, Sr. DR For the Respondent : Shri S B Vaidya, AR ORDER Per: Anil Chaturvedi: 1. The present appeal filed by the Revenue is against the order of CIT (A)-II, Ahmedabad dated 01-04-2011 for the assessment year 2008-09 whereby the penalty of ₹ 2,50,00,000/- levied u/s. 271AAA by the A.O. was deleted by CIT (A). 2. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ause the first two conditions of section 271AAA(2) are not fulfilled by the appellant. The provisions of sub section (2) of section 271AAA is reproduced as under:- (i) in the course of the search, in a statement under sub-section (4) of section 132, admits the undisclosed income and specifies the manner in which such income has been derived; (ii) Substantiates the manner in which the undisclosed income was derived and (iii) Pays the tax, together with interest, if any, in respect of the undisclosed income. Clause (i) lays down the first condition that undisclosed income should have been admitted by. assessee in the statement u/s. 132(4) and assessee should specify the manner in which it has been derived. Shri Gopalbhai Dokania i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... supported by the evidences mentioned by Assessing Officer in assessment order. Assessing officer himself at Pg.10 of the penalty order has given references to various incriminating evidences documents and transactions in support of receipt of on-money by assessee. So the manner in which income of ₹ 25 crores has been earned and disclosed is proved by incriminating documents found during the search and referred by the Assessing Officer in assessment order and penalty order. The manner in which undisclosed income was derived is substantiated by virtue of various evidences collected in the course of search itself and has also been referred by assessing officer in the assessment order. Clause (iii) lays down the third condition is r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5. Before us, ld. D.R. supported the order of A.O. On the other hand ld. A.R. reiterated the submissions made before A.O and ld. CIT(A) and further placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Mahendra C. Shah (2008) 299 ITR 305 (Guj). 6. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The issue in the present case is with respect to levy of penalty u/s. 271AAA. We find that ld. CIT(A) while deleting the penalty has noted that Assessee had disclosed the amount in the statement made u/s. 132(4), has substantiated the undisclosed income by quantifying the amount of ₹ 25 crore and thus the requirement of specifying the manner for which the income has been earned has b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
