9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 614X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arned A. R., on the other hand, submitted that after the filing of return of income a survey took place u/s 133A of the Act and certain incriminating documents showing payments of Rs. 77,42,720/- were found and thereafter the assessee surrendered such payment and offered the same in the form of revised return and the assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of the Act wherein the Assessing Officer had noted this fact and had accepted the surrender. It was argued that the Assessing Officer thereafter imposed penalty for concealment of income on this amount of surrender by holding that the assessee had concealed the income in its original return of income. Learned A. R. submitted that the revised return was filed well within the prescribed period of time wherein such surrender was offered as income and Assessing Officer did not make any addition to the returned income on this account and therefore, it cannot be said that assessee had concealed any income or had furnished wrong particulars of income and therefore, learned CIT(A) after relying on a number of case laws had rightly deleted the addition. 4. We have heard the rival parties and have gone through the material placed on record. W ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... amount surrendered on survey was shown in the return of income. 7(2)(i) Hon'ble ITAT, Banglore in the case of Muninaga Reddy Vs ACIT (2013) 37 Taxmann.com 440 (Banglore - Trib) has examined the issue. The head note read as under- Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Penalty - For concealment of income [Survey, declaration of income after, effect of] - Assessment year 2008-09 - Assessee along with one 'E' developed a layout of house site -Competent Authority conducted a survey under section 133A upon 'E' on 11-11- 2009 - Consequent to survey, assessee declared his share of income from joint venture at Rs. 81 lakhs - In return of income filed for assessment year 2008-09 on 9-6-2010, assessee apart from other income also declared aforesaid income of Rs. 81 lakhs as income from business - Assessing Officer accepted said income and passed assessment order - He also levied penalty under section 271(1)(c) on plea that but for survey operations under section 133A assessee had declared income of Rs. 81 lakhs and, therefore, he had concealed particulars of income to extent ofRs. 81 lakhs - Whether since assessee had made a complete disclosure in return of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .... The ld. CIT(A) has followed the decision of this Bench of the Tribunal rendered in the case of DOT Vs. Dr. Satish B Gupta (42 SOT 48)(Ahd). Ld. CIT-DR has contended that the CIT(A) failed to appreciate the fact that the additional income amounting to Rs. 41,73,000/- was declared in consequence to the survey action by the Revenue. However, it is not disputed by the Id. CIT-DR that the assessee has declared this income in his original Return of Income, although it was belated return. As per provisions of Section 271(1)(c) of the Incometax Act, penalty can be imposed if the assessee has concealed the particulars of income or furnishing the inaccurate particulars of such income. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that the particulars of income are reflected in the Return of Income. It is not the case of the Revenue that the returns of income filed were invalid. In fact, the Assessing Officer has proceeded on the basis of the returns filed by the assessee and particulars furnished therein. Therefore, we do not see any good reason to interfere with the order of the Id. CIT(A) which is hereby confirmed. Thus, this ground of appeal of the Revenue is rejected." 4.3. In the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ure as the assessee had made a complete disclosure in the IT return and offered the surrendered amount for the purposes of tax. 15. For the reasons given above we hold that there can be no justification for imposition of penalty on the income offered in the return of income by the Assessee for both the A.Ys., because there cannot be any penalty on income which is declared in a return of income, on the facts and circumstances of the present case. 7(2)(iv) The issue was also decided by Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs SAS Pharmaceuticals in ITA No. 1058 of 2009 dated 08.01.2011: 13. It is not the case of furnishing inaccurate particular of income, as in the income tax return, particulars of income have been duly furnished and the surrendered amount of income was duly reflected in the income tax return. The question is whether the particulars of income were concealed by the assessee or not It would depend upon the issue as to whether this concealment has reference to the income tax return filed by the assessee, viz., whether concealment is to be found in the income tax return. 16. No doubt, the discrepancies were found during the survey. This has yielded ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
