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

The Dy. CIT Circle-1 (3) , Ahmedabad Versus Shri Mukesh Kalubhai Prajapati

2017 (9) TMI 658 - ITAT AHMEDABAD

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - addition u/s 68 - voluntary surrender of income - Held that:- The case of the assessee is squarely covered by the observations of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in MAK data Pvt.Ltd. (2013 (11) TMI 14 - SUPREME COURT) wherein observed that the statute does not recognize defences like ‘voluntary disclosure’, ‘buy peace’, ‘avoid litigation’, ‘amicable settlement’ etc. Thus, even voluntary surrender of income will not always necessarily rescue the assessee from the penalty provisi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

sessee has not expressed its handicap anywhere before the lower authorities on the alleged vagueness of notice issued under s.274 r.w.s.271(1)(c) which prevented him in his response in any manner. The onus which lays upon the assessee to rebut the presumption of concealment under Explanation - 1 to s.271(1)(c) has not been discharged. Under the circumstances, the order of the CIT(A) is requires to be reversed and the penalty order of the AO requires to be upheld. - Decided in favour of revenue - .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

; 43 lakhs made under s.68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ). 2. Briefly stated, it was noticed by Assessing Officer (AO) in the course of scrutiny assessment for the AY 2008-09 that assessee has obtained unsecured loan of ₹ 43 lakhs from one M/s.Sudarshan Enterprise. The AO on verification of PAN data on computer found that the PAN of the depositor M/s.Sudarshan Enterprise mentioned in the confirmation file does not pertain to it. Therefore to verify the ge .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

uy peace and avoid prolonged litigation. The assessee claimed that disclosure has been made voluntarily and requested for non-initiation of penalty. In these circumstances, the additions were made and penalty was imposed thereon. 3. In the first appeal, the CIT(A) found merit and deleted the penalty of ₹ 14,61,570/- levied by the AO under s.271(1)(c) of the Act. The relevant operative para of the order of the CIT(A) is reproduced hereunder:- DECISION: 4. The submissions made by the appella .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

account. On verification u/s 133(6) of the Act done by the AO, M/s Sudarshan Enterprise denied to have any transactions with the appellant. Therefore, during the assessment proceedings the appellant admitted ₹ 43 lakhs as his undisclosed income and paid taxes upon it. The AO made addition u/s 68 of the Act and penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) were initiated by issuing notice u/s 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c)of the Act. 4.1 The appellant filed appeal before the CIT(A) against the initiation of pena .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

sued on 28-10-2010, whereas penalty was imposed on 20-03-2014. The contention of the appellant is not as per the provisions of the Act, as the appeal filed by the appellant was pending before the CIT(A), which was decided on 16-04-2012 and the penalty has, been imposed on 20-03-2014 which is within the time period allowed u/s 275 of the Act. Therefore, this contention of the assessee is dismissed. ii) The second argument taken by the appellant is that the notice dtd, 28-10-2010 issued u/s 274 r. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d that the AO has not specifically mentioned whether the appellant concealed particulars of income or furnished inaccurate particulars of income. Even in the penalty order dtd. 20-3-2014, there is no mention for which default the penalty has been imposed. As mentioned by the appellant, the jurisdictional Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat, Ahmedabad in the case of CIT vs. White Ford India Ltd. adjudicated that where no clear finding was recorded by the AO whether assessee was guilty of concealing .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ent proceedings with specific request to buy peace of mind and avoid further litigation. The appellant relied upon the case of Sir Shadi Lal Sugar & General Mills Ltd. (168 ITR 705) (SC) in which it has been held that there may be 101 reasons for agreeing to additions but that does not follow the conclusion that amount agreed to be added was concealed income. On going through the assessment order and penalty order, it is found that the appellant has agreed for the additions with the specific .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

/2011. Keeping in view the facts of the case and case laws cited, the penalty levied by the AO is not found justified, therefore, it is deleted. 4. Aggrieved, the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. 5. None appeared on behalf of the assessee. It is seen from the record that the notices were sent on various occasions in the past to the assessee. However, the assessee has failed to appear on the appointed date. The notice was served through the Income Tax Department also without any avail. I .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

voluntarily at all. The request of the assessee not to impose penalty was not accepted by the AO at all. The Ld.DR referred to the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of MAK Data Pvt Ltd. vs. CIT 358 ITR 593(SC) and submitted that the aforesaid decision squarely governs the issue. 7. We have carefully perused the orders of the authorities below as well as the submissions made on behalf of the revenue. We observe that the additions have been made under s.68 of the Act as purported .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Forum
what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| 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