TMI Blog2019 (10) TMI 16X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... explanation in respect of the difference between the original income and the revised income and sustained the penalty levied by the AO. Before us also, the assessee is not able to offer any explanation in 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 ₹ 84,88,83 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0/- 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 that order, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) and the ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal. Aggrieved against that order, the assessee is on appeal before this Tribunal. 3. The ld.AR submitted that the revised income admitted by the assessee was accepted by the AO without any addition. The ld.AR invited our attention to the copy of sworn statement recorded U/s.131 on 17.11.2014 at the time of survey and submitted that the assessee could not determine his profit year-wise. However, he replied that he would have made a profit of ₹ 20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 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 and he was a land aggregator. He has not maintained any books of account till the financial year 2010-11. From the statement recorded, it is clear that the Revenue found a lot of materials during the course of survey and on confrontation, the assessee agreed to admit ₹ 20 crores for the past six financial years, which he has not disclosed so far. On the post survey enquiry and on further confrontation of material, etc., the assessee admitted ₹ 97,38,000/- as his income for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 377; 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 ₹ 97,38,000/- and admitted the same before the DDIT(Inv.), Unit- 4(3). On receipt of such intimation, the AO issued notice U/s.148. The assessee filed revised return of ₹ 97,38,000/- which was reassessed and penalty proceedings U/s.271(1)(c) was initiated. During the penalty proceedings,the assessee has not given any explanation towards the discrepancy between the difference in the income admitted in the original and the revised return ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
