TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 979X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r with the interest on the undisclosed income thereafter. We further find that assessee had already paid tax along with interest, although belatedly, but there is no limitation prescribed for the same under Clause 2 of Explanation 5 to Section 271 (1) (c) as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Gebilal Kanhaialal HUF 2012 (9) TMI 297 - SUPREME COURT). - Decided in favour of assessee - D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 26 / 2018, D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 28 / 2018 - - - Dated:- 2-2-2018 - Hon'ble Mr. Justice Gopal Krishan Vyas And Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vinit Kumar Mathur For the Appellant : Mr. K.K.Bissa ORDER (Per Hon ble Mr.Justice Vinit Kumar Mathur) The present appeals have been preferred to challenge ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of ₹ 1,19,78,419/- and agriculture income of ₹ 1,26,378/-. The Assessing Officer accepted the returns filed by the assessee but at the same time, initiated the penalty proceedings under section 271 (1) (c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for concealment of income on the amount offered in the returns filed under section 153 (A) of the Income Tax Act. After giving opportunity of hearing to the assessee, the Assessing Officer imposed the penalty of ₹ 23,21,400/- for the assessment year 2006-07 and penalty of ₹ 76,84,910/- for the assessment year 2007-08 respectively vide its order dated 17.06.2009. The assessing officer further held that the income which was surrendered by the assessee was not disclosed in the original retu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 132 (4), manner in which such income stood derived. Thirdly, the assessee has to pay tax together with interest, if any, in respect of such undisclosed income. Since, all these conditions were being fulfilled by the assessee in the present case, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) allowed the appeals filed by the respondent- asseessee relying upon various judgments cited before him including the judgment of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Gebilal Kanhaialal HUF (supra). The revenue assailed validity of orders dated 03.07.2015 and 06.07.2015 before learned ITAT but learned ITAT after hearing counsel for the parties rejected the appeals filed by the revenue vide its orders dated 22.05.2017. Heard Mr. K.K.Bissa, learned counse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ee pays the tax along with interest in respect of such income. We find that all the three conditions in the present case have been fulfilled because after the search and seizure, the assessee had admitted in his statement that income has been derived from the land deals in the present case and thereafter, he filed returns in pursuance of the notice issued to him under section 153 (A) of the Income Tax Act by declaring the same in the returns of income and further, the assessee had paid tax together with the interest on the undisclosed income thereafter. We further find that assessee had already paid tax along with interest, although belatedly, but there is no limitation prescribed for the same under Clause 2 of Explanation 5 to Sectio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
