9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (10) TMI 16X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tting a total income of Rs. 12,91,169/-. A survey was conducted at the premises of the assessee on 17.11.2014 by the DDIT(Inv.), Unit 4(3), Chennai. During the post survey proceedings, the assessee admitted income for the assessment year 2008-09 at Rs. 97,38,400/-. Subsequently, the AO issued a notice U/s.148 on 25.03.2015. The assessee filed a revised return on 15.07.2015, admitting a total income of Rs. 97,38,400/- with all taxes duly paid. The AO accepted the returned income in the reassessment, however, due to difference in calculation of interest, a demand of Rs. 3,23,260/- was raised which was also paid on 07.06.2016. Thereafter, the AO initiated penalty proceedings U/s.271(1)(c) and levied penalty U/s.271(1)(c). Aggrieved against t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .271(1)(c) is not warranted and hence pleaded to allow the appeal. He relied on the same case laws which he relied in support of his contention before the ld.CIT(A). The ld.AR further submitted that while levying the penalty, the AO has not reduced the original income admitted by the assessee at Rs. 12,91,169/- in the original return and he levied the penalty on the taxes on Rs. 96,38,000/-, i.e., on the total income admitted in the revised return which included the total income of Rs. 12,91,169/- admitted in the original return income also. 4. Per contra, the ld.DR invited to the relevant portion of the sworn statement relied on by the AR and the orders of the lower authorities submitted that the assessee was doing real estate business an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed on by the assessee were distinguished by the ld.CIT(A) and held that in the assessee's case, the huge surrender of income made by the assessee has direct nexes to the findings of the survey outcome. Therefore, the ld.DR pleaded that the penalty levied U/s.271(1)(c) be confirmed. 5. We have considered the rival submissions. The facts are that the assessee filed the return for assessment year 2008-09 admitting total income of Rs. 12,91,169/-. It is clear that during the survey, the department found various materials and confronted the assessee. After the survey, the assessee on going through such materials quantified the total income for the assessment year 2008-09 at Rs. 97,38,000/- and admitted the same before the DDIT(Inv.), Unit- 4(3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... respect of the difference of income admitted between the original and revised returns as required under Explanation 1 of section 271(1)(c) of the Act. Therefore, the differential sum, between the revised return and original return is deemed to represent the income in respect of which particulars have been concealed. Therefore, we sustain the penalty levied U/s.271(1)(c) to that extent. As pointed out by the ld.AR, the levy of penalty could be made only on the tax that is sought to be evaded on the undisclosed income of Rs. 84,88,831/- (Rs. 97,80,000 - Rs. 12,91,169) only. Therefore, we direct the AO to recompute the penalty U/s.271(1)(c), accordingly. The assessee's appeal is allowed to this extent. 6. In the result, the assessee's appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
