TMI Blog2016 (9) TMI 913X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... seen from the assessment order. He has fulfilled the requirement as per section 271AAA(2) of the Act. Even though, in the Lok Adalat order, there is no mention about the details of the compromise, the circumstantial evidence points to the claim of the assessee, we have to consider the submissions of the assessee in this case. Accordingly, we are of the view that the assessee has fulfilled the requirement of sub-section (2) of section 271AAA. Hence, the penalty levied u/s 271AAA is accordingly deleted. - Decided in favour of assessee - ITA No. 470/Hyd/2016 - - - Dated:- 10-8-2016 - SMT P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For The Assessee : Shri B. Shanthi Kumar For The Revenue : Shri K. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessee to explain as to why the penalty should not be levied. The assessee was asked to appear or submit his explanation in this regard on 06.05.2014. The assessee made his submissions vide letter dated 06.05.2014 . 4. In reply to penalty notice U/s. 271AAA for A.Y. 2013-14 dated 22.04.2014, assessee explained how the income was earned, the manner in which the income earned and about payment of taxes thereon as under: The assessee has taken premises in the building known as City Center in Plot bearing No. 7 Sy. No. 7 (7/C), situated at Margadarsi Colony.Kotnapet, Hyderabad, from M/s. SIRI MAHAMART TRADING PRIVATE LIMITED, having registered office at H.No. 4-1/2, Maruthi Nagar, Kothapet, Hyderabad - 500 060, represented by its D ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mes to ₹ 4,99,504/-. 6. When the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(A), the CIT(A) upheld the penalty levied by AO by observing as under: It is seen that from the assessment order dt. 22-04-2014 that this case has been handled and monitored Investigation Wing, Unit-II, Hyd. As per order u/s. 271AAA dt. 28.05.2014, it is categorically said that, though the cash was found by the police ,subsequently, a warrant u/s. 132 A(l) was issued. Since a warrant was issued in name of the Assessee there is no doubt that there was a search / action as per S- 132 in this case. This fulfils the criteria of levying the penalty. Assessee contention is found incorrect, that there was no search. Hence, I upheld the penalty levied ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ious year. He has no books of account or other documents or transactions. The impugned income was assessable in Asst. Year 2013-14 and the assessee filed the Return of Income on 26.04.2013 disclosing the entire income of ₹ 49,95,000/-. As for payment of advance-tax, the only source of income was the amount of ₹ 49,95,000/- received on compromise and this was' already in the custody of department. This covers both the tax and interest. Further, the advance-tax liability actually arises on 15.09.2012 but the department took custody of the entire amount on 30.05.2012 itself. The due date for disclosure of the impugned income was 31.07.2013 whereas the assessee disclosed the same on 26.04.2013 itself. The cash was received on26- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ax. The ld. AR relied on the following case laws: 1. ACIT Vs. Hicons Developers in ITA No. 913/ Mum/ 2014 dated 30.12.2015 2. Hindustan Steel Ltd. Vs. State of Orissa, reported in (1970) AIR 253, 1970 SCR (1) 753 dated 04.08.1969 wherein it was held: An order imposing penalty for failure to carry out a statutory obligation is the result of a quasi criminal proceeding, and penalty will not ordinarily be imposed unless the party obliged either acted deliberately in defiance of law or was guilty of conduct contumacious or dishonest, or acted in conscious disregard of its obligation. Penalty will not also be imposed merely because it is lawful to do so. Whether penalty should be imposed for failure to perform a statutory obligation i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... together with interest, if any, in respect of the undisclosed income. 10.1 As per the provision, to avoid penalty, assessee had to admit the undisclosed income and specify the manner in which income was derived, he has to substantiate the manner in which income was derived and pay tax, together with interest in respect of the undisclosed income. In the present case, the assessee had disclosed the income and specified as well as disclosed the manner in which the undisclosed income was arrived and also paid the tax with interest. The cash was very much with the department as can be seen from the assessment order. He has fulfilled the requirement as per section 271AAA(2) of the Act. Even though, in the Lok Adalat order, there is no ment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
