Feedback   New User   Subscription   Demo   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 →

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Udaipur Versus Shri Shanti Lal Jain, Prop. M/s Meenakshi Property Dealer, Udaipur

2018 (2) TMI 979 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - concealment of income on the amount offered in the returns filed under section 153 (A) - undisclosed income - Held that:- 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 decla .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

me 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 the order dated 22.05.2017 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Jodhpur Bench, Jodhpur (Hereinafter referred to as ITAT ) in Income Tax Appeal Nos.454/Jodh/2015 & 455/Jodh/20 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

espondent- assessee is a property dealer who is engaged in the business of Real Estate. The assessee is doing the business in the name of M/s Meenakshi Property Dealers and also earned income from the partnership firm and bank interest during the assessment year 2005-06. Return of income tax was filed by the assessee on 31.10.2006 declaring the total income of ₹ 50,96,699/- and agricultural income of ₹ 1,26,378/-. A search and seizure operation under section 132 of the Income Tax Act .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

edings 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 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

is in accordance with law. The respondent- assessee aggrieved of this order dated 17.06.2009 passed by the assessing officer preferred two separate appeals Nos.144/2009-10 & 145/2009-10 before learned Commissioner of Income Tax. In appeals, learned Commissioner of Income Tax vide its orders dated 03.07.2015 and 06.07.2015 while deleting the amount of penalty allowed the appeals in the light of decision of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of ACIT vs. Gebilal Kanhaialal HUF, reported in [2012 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ly, the assessee should specify, in his statement under section 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 Cour .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ve not been followed in the present case in its true letter and spirit. He submits that disclosure of the income was done by the respondent- assessee after search and seizure was made at his residence and business premise, therefore, disclosure is not bonafide and the assessee has not disclosed his true and correct income in the returns filed by him under section 139 (1) of the Income Tax Act. Had there been no search and seizure on the premise of the assessee, the income which is disclosed afte .....

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