TMI Blog2014 (3) TMI 1140X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rther addition assessed the income at returned income in the assessment order. Thus, the observation of the A.O. that the assessee had intentionally evaded tax is based on incorrect facts. The assessee has explained the modus of earning this income in his statement either u/s 132(4) and 131 of the Act. It is true that no specific manner of disclosing the undisclosed income is provided in the Act. Therefore, only on this ultra technical point, penalty u/s 271AAA of the Act cannot be imposed - Decided against revenue. - ITA No. 530/JU/2013 - - - Dated:- 5-3-2014 - SHRI HARI OM MARATHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K.SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For The Assessee : Shri Rishab Agrawal For The Department : Shri Deepak Sehgal, DR ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g of the ld. CIT(A) apart from placing on record the entire record pertaining to the initiation and imposition of this penalty. 6. We have heard the rival submissions and have carefully perused the entire material on record. WE have found that the assessee had made disclosure in his revised return on 25.1.2011. As per the A.O, this cannot be treated as a voluntary disclosure of income because it was result of search that the assessee filed the revised return. As per the A.O, the assessee did not disclose the income in his original return fi led on 4.7.2010 but has disclosed the same in the revised return filed on 25.1.2011. Thus, in view of the A.O., in the above circumstances, the assessee is not entitled to benefit of section u/s 271AA ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d income but has also substantiated the manner in which the undisclosed income was derived. Regarding observation of the A.O. that in the statement recorded u/s 132(4) of the Act, the assessee failed to substantiate the manner in which income was derived is not found to be correct after perusal of the statement recorded u/s 132(4) of the Act and recorded u/s 131 of the Act. He has also observed that the penalty proceedings u/s 271AAA of the Act were required to be initiated before 1.7.2012 as the search was initiated after 1.6.2007. He has observed that the A.O. has accepted the returned disclosed income in the revised return but the reason given for initiating penalty is that the disclosure is not voluntary. With these observations, the ld ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... It is true that no specific manner of disclosing the undisclosed income is provided in the Act. Therefore, only on this ultra technical point, penalty u/s 271AAA of the Act cannot be imposed. In this regard, decision of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs. Radha Kishan Goel [2006] 152 Taxman 290 [All] and the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Mahendra C. Shah [2008] 172 Taxman 58 [Guj] are relevant. Moreover, from the statements, we have observed that the authorized officer has not specifically asked to the assessee during such proceedings about the manner in which the assessee has earned undisclosed income. Regarding observation of the A.O. that the assessee should have appealed ag ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
