Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central-III, Kolkata Versus M/s. Saraf Agencies Ltd.

2016 (7) TMI 957 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT

Penalty leviable under Section 158BFA(2) - whether the penalty proceedings initially started by the assessing officer for an undisclosed income of a sum of ₹ 491.50 lakhs should be allowed to continue for the sum of ₹ 37 lakhs which has ultimately been found to be the undisclosed income of the assessee? - Held that:- There was some sort of understanding between the department and the director of the assessee company as to the person who should disclose the income on the basis of the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ed at ₹ 2.02 crores approximately and undisclosed income of the company was assessed at ₹ 37 lakhs. Both the CIT(A) and the Tribunal were of the opinion that in the facts of the case no penalty should be levied upon the company. The understanding arrived at between the revenue, the company and the director has not been disproved nor is that finding assailed. Imposition of penalty, when returns of undisclosed income were filed in consultation with the revenue, would certainly have bee .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Kolkata in I.T.(S.S.)A. No.85/Kol/2008 pertaining to the block period commencing from 1st April, 1996 to 5th July, 2002, by which the learned Tribunal dismissed an appeal preferred by the revenue. Aggrieved revenue has come up in appeal. The following question of law was formulated on 17th December, 2009 when the appeal was admitted:- Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is justified in not considering the penalty is leviable under Section 158BFA(2 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

91.50 lakhs. In an appeal preferred by the assessee company the sum of ₹ 491.50 lakhs was reduced by the CIT(A) to a sum of ₹ 37 lakhs. The CIT did not direct commencement of any penalty proceedings. The assessing officer as already indicated had on the basis of seized documents assessed the undisclosed income of the company at a sum of ₹ 491.50 lakhs and had also started penalty proceedings. When the amount of undisclosed income was reduced by the CIT(A), in the quantum appeal .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

(A) for the following reasons:- According to the discussion with the Department, the entire income on the basis of seized document was to be declared in the case of the Managing Director of the company Shri S.M.Shroff. He, accordingly, made the disclosure of ₹ 2.16 Crore u/s. 132(4) and gave a detailed working in his petition dt.20.09.2002. He, accordingly, filed his return for the same amount and as the consequence of this, the appellant company was bound to declare NIL undisclosed income .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

said facts, the CIT(Appeals) was of the opinion that: When the Assessing Officer was unable to decide that the undisclosed income reflected in the seized document belongs to appellant company or its Managing Director, the question of concealment becomes irrelevant. For the purpose of concealment, there has to be a clear finding that the income treated as concealed income, belong to the appellant company. 17. It is true that the penalty is with reference to the undisclosed income finally determin .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nly in the course of assessment proceedings under Chapter XIVB. If the income finally determined by the Appellate Authority is different from the determination of undisclosed income in the original block assessment order, penalty proceedings originally initiated cannot be revised after giving effect to the order of Appellate Authority. 18. These are technical arguments but the penalty appears uncalled for because there is no difference between the declaration of undisclosed income by Shri S.M. S .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ome positive income in the nature of undisclosed income after appellate decision, is not justified. Considering the totality of circumstances, the judicial discretion restricting that the Assessing Officer permits him not to levy penalty and omission of exercise it appears unjustified. Accordingly, the order of penalty is cancelled and the appeal allowed. The learned Tribunal was of the following opinion: We are of the considered view that the Ld. CIT(A) has rightly held that considering the tot .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

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

Go to Mobile Version