Tax Management India. Com
                        Law and Practice: A Digital eBook ...

Category of Documents

TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Case Laws Acts Notifications Circulars Classification Forms Manuals SMS News Articles
Highlights
D. Forum
What's New

Share:      

        Home        
 

TMI Blog

Home List
← Previous Next →

2019 (5) TMI 345

.O. at the assessment stage - HELD THAT:- It is an admitted fact that the case was selected for scrutiny and A.O. raised questionnaire to the assessee and called for the explanation of assessee on all the above four issues. The assessee instead of explaining any of the above issues or to file any documentary evidences in support of the same, surrendered the amounts in question for taxation. Therefore, clearly show that assessee made the surrender of the above amounts in question only when A.O. has confronted the assessee with above issues and cornered the assessee at the assessment stage. Thus, the assessee did not make any voluntary surrender of the amounts in question. Assessee had concealed the material facts and given incorrect statement of fact in the return of income. The assessee provided incorrect facts which were marshaled by the A.O. It would show that assessee’s disclosure was not voluntary but under compulsion when cornered by the A.O. at the assessment stage. The assessee did not offer any explanation on any of the above issues either at the assessment stage or at the penalty proceedings. Explanation-1 to Section 271(1)(c) is clearly attracted. Had the case .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

ised by the A.O. on this issue, the assessee ultimately, surrendered ₹ 13,29,200/- on account of the cash deposits in the Bank account. The A.O. accordingly made addition under section 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961. 4. The A.O. further noted that assessee has taken unsecured loans amounting to ₹ 32,16,000/-. However, assessee failed to file confirmation, PAN and address of two of the lenders namely Khullar and Trilok Singh in a sum of ₹ 2,20,000/-. The assessee in response to the query of the A.O. surrendered the amount of ₹ 2,20,000/-. The A.O. added the same amount under section 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961. 5. The A.O. on perusal of the balance-sheet filed by the assessee found that assessee has shown sundry creditors amounting to ₹ 44,16,313/-, assessee was asked to provide confirmation, PAN and address of the three sundry creditors namely (1) ART N Glass Inc., (2) Critianbas Masi and (3) Syali in a sum of ₹ 1,33,897/-. Assessee did not provide any details to the query of the A.O. and ultimately, surrendered the amount of ₹ 1,33,897/-. The A.O. treated the same as unexplained credit under section 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961 and made the addition. 6 .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

(All.) (iii) Judgment of Hon ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT, Chennai vs. Smt. Anita Kumaran, Chennai in Tax Case (Appeal) Nos.139 to 141 of 2017, Dated 01.03.2017 (iv) Order of ITAT, Delhi E-Bench in the case of Shri Nikunj Jain, Meerut City vs. CIT, Muzaffarnagar in ITA.No.3075/Del./2013, Dated 09.12.2015. 9. On the other hand, Ld. D.R. relied upon the Orders of the authorities below and relied upon Judgment of Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Dr. Vandana Gupta [2018] 92 taxmann.com 229 (Del.), in which it was held as under : Mere voluntary offer of a sum during survey in absence of any explanation for source of income, invites concealment penalty when original return was silent about said sum. 10. I have considered the rival submissions and do not find any justification to interfere with the Orders of the authorities below and in levying and confirming the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961. It is an admitted fact that the case was selected for scrutiny and A.O. raised questionnaire to the assessee and called for the explanation of assessee on all the above four issues. The assessee instead of explaining any of the above issues or to f .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

der : The findings given in assessment proceedings are relevant and have probative value. Where the assessee produces no fresh evidence or presents any additional or fresh circumstance in penalty proceedings, he would be deemed to have failed to discharge the onus placed on him and the levy of penalty could be justified. Even if there is no concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars, but on the basis thereof the claim which is made is ex facie bogus, it may still attract penalty provision. 10.2. The Hon ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Rajinder Mohan Lal vs. Pr. CIT [2017] 399 ITR 223 (P&H) held that when assessee failed to prove genuineness of the gifts and identity and creditworthiness of the donors and explanation offered by assessee was not substantiated through any evidence or material on record, would amount to concealment of income. Penalty to be imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act. 10.3. The Hon ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Basant Singh, Prop. Basant General Store vs. CIT [2017] 399 ITR 247 (P&H) held that when addition was made to the income in quantum assessment, it would invite levy of penalty .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

 

 

← Previous Next →

 

 

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || Database || Members || Refer Us ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.
|| Blog || Site Map - Recent || Site Map ||