TMI Blog2019 (7) TMI 434X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... same in the return of income which was added by the AO and thereafter initiated penalty proceedings u/s. 271 (1) (c) and levied penalty of ₹ 71,886/- being 300% of the tax sought to be evaded. In my opinion levy of penalty @ 300% is not justified - Therefore, restrict the same to 100% tax sought to be evaded which amounts to ₹ 23,962/-. - Decided partly in favour of assessee. - ITA ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the Assessing Officer u/s. 271 (1) (c) of the Act which has been confirmed by the CIT(A) is the only issued raised by the assessee in the grounds of appeal. 4. Facts of the case, in brief, are that assessment in this case was completed u/s. 147 /143(3) of the Act on 28.03.2016 at a total income of ₹ 2,79,810/- as against the returned income of ₹ 1,04,490/- by making ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the AO confronted the AR of the appellant regarding the issue of capital gain on the sale of gold and silver jewellery, the appellant filed details of LTCG of ₹ 1,70,317/- vide letter dated 04/03/2016. Addition on account of LTCG amounting to ₹ 1,70,317/- was made by the AO. Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1 )(c) were also initiated and penalty of ₹ 71,886/- at the rate of 300% of ta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) The Hon ble Court has held that - The statute does not recognize those types of defences under Explanation 1 to sec. 271(1)(c) of the Act. It is trite law that the voluntary disclosure does not release the assessee from the mischief of penal proceedings. The law does not provide that when an assessee makes a voluntary disclosure of his concealed income, he had to be absolved from penal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
