Contact us   Feedback   Annual Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (1) TMI 745 - ITAT DELHI

2016 (1) TMI 745 - ITAT DELHI - TMI - Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - income has been detected on account of scrutiny assessment - Held that:- It is evident that the assessee had received the amount of ₹ 5,38,854/-, which should have been made the assessee curious about this entry in his bank account. Therefore, it is clear that this amount had not been truly disclosed and explained by the assessee at the time of filing of its return of income, therefore, this amount was treated as concealed incom .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ghtly confirmed the penalty of ₹ 1,25,306/- instead of ₹ 1,45,906/-. Hence, no reason to interfere with the well reasoned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) - Decided against assessee. - ITA No. 4995/Del/2015 - Dated:- 30-10-2015 - SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER For The Assessee: Sh. P. Dam Kanunjna, Sr. DR For The Department : Sh. V.K. Sehgal, CA ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU, JM This appeal by the Assessee is directed against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-22, New D .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

was completed u/s. 143(3) of the I.T. Act 1961 on 5.3.2013 at a total income of ₹ 7,38,850/- against the returned income of ₹ 2,00,000/-. During the assessment proceedings, while examining the blank statement it was noticed that the deposits of ₹ 4,84,969/- and ₹ 18,24,975/- appearing on 24.2.2010. The assessee was asked to furnish the source of these deposits. In response, vide letter dated 15.1.2013 the assessee stated that he booked a flat with BPTP Ltd and it does no .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ish its reply. On the fixed date neither the assessee nor its representative attended. Another show cause notice u/s. 271(1)© of the I.T. Act, 1961 dated 5.8.2013 was issued and the case was fixed for 21.8.2013. On the fixed date, again no compliance has been made by the assessee. In view of these facts, it seems that the assessee has nothing to say in this regard and therefore, the AO held that the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of his income to the extent of ₹ 5,38,85 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

fore the Tribunal. 6. Ld. Counsel of the assessee reiterated the contentions raised in the grounds of appeal and requested that the penalty in dispute may be deleted. 7. On the contrary, Ld. DR relied upon the order of the authorities below. 8. I have heard both the parties and perused the records, especially the orders of the revenue authorities. I find that the Ld. CIT(A) has elaborately dealt with the issue in dispute and held as under:- a) From the facts of the case, it is clear that the int .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

amount had been surrendered by the assessee. It is therefore, clear that this amount would not have been taxed if the case had not been under scrutiny. It is also clear that the appellant had not fully disclosed all the facts at the time of filing of return of income. Though the AR has relied upon various judicial pronouncements to argue that there was no intention or desired to concealed the income, in the present case it was evident that the assessee had received this substantial amount of &# .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

as been detected on account of scrutiny assessment and would be evaded if the scrutiny assessment was not done the penalty on concealment should be imposed. Therefore, in my opinion the AO was fully justified imposing the penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961. c) However, with regard to the computation of amount the AO is directed to reduce the amount of TDS, if the same has not been considered for taxes already paid by the appellant. Similarly, the AO may verify the claim of the appellan .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version