TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 1017X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dence but same is not conclusive in the penalty proceedings Further, merely because Assessee has not challenged the order of assessment levying tax and interest and has paid tax and interest that by itself will not be sufficient for the authorities either to initiate penalty proceedings or impose penalty. In the present case, we are of the view that in the absence of complete and convincing corroborative evidence, the Revenue may justify addition, but in the matter of penalty proceedings, the onus lies heavily on the Revenue to prove that the assessee had concealed its income or has filed inaccurate particulars of its income. No penalty is leviable u/s 271(1)(c) and therefore direct its deletion. Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No: ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o delete the penalty on the disallowance of deduction u/s. 80D (Rs. 4401) and on the addition of ₹ 64,717/- on account of additional income but however confirmed the penalty on the addition of unsecured loan (Rs. 72,250/-) and addition of opening cash balance (Rs. 2,04,015) by holding as under:- 13. When the present case is examined in view of this legal position, it is found that in this case appellant failed to offer any explanation regarding opening cash balance ₹ 204,015/- before AO during assessment and penalty proceedings. Another addition of ₹ 72,250/- was made on account of unsecured loans shown by appellant. In respect of these loans, appellant failed to prove their genuineness before AO. This cannot be consid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bad [for short CIT (A)] has grievously erred in law and on facts in conforming the penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) on the agreed addition u/s. 68 of ₹ 72,250/- in total disregard of the facts of the case and additional evidence brought on record in the course of penalty proceedings. 2. The Id. CIT(A) has grievously erred in law and on facts in confirming the penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) on agreed addition of ₹ 2,04,015/-, being cash balance as on 07-12-2007, on the ground that the said cash balance was generated out of loan taken in cash during the previous year relevant to A.Y. 2008-2009 and was reflected in the opening cash balance as on 01-04-2008, in total disregard of the fact that the sum which cannot be taxed as income in the rele ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en made would not make Assessee liable for penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. He therefore prayed that the penalty be deleted. Ld. D.R. on the other hand supported the order of A.O and ld. CIT(A). 7. 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. 271(1)(c). The penalty under s. 271(l)(c) of the Act is leviable if the AO is satisfied in the course of any proceedings under the Act that any person has concealed the particulars of his income or furnished inaccurate particulars of such income. 8. The necessary ingredients for attracting Explanation 1 to Section. 271(l)(c) are that: (i) the person fails to offer the explanation, or (ii) he offers ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l facts relevant thereto have been furnished and once it is so established, the assessee cannot be held liable for concealment penalty u/s. 271(1) (c) of the Act. 10. A case for levy of penalty for concealment of income has to be evaluated in terms of provisions of Explanation. 1 to Section. 271(1)(c), as per which if in relation to any addition in the assessment, the assessee offers no explanation or offers explanation which is found to be false or is not able to substitute the explanation and is also not able to prove that the explanation is bonafide, the addition made would amount to concealment of particulars of income. It is a settled legal position that penalty proceedings are different from assessment proceedings and the findings ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
