TMI Blog2012 (9) TMI 1169X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... an (JM) All the six appeals of the revenue are directed against the common order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax(A) confirming the penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for the assessment years 2003-04 to 2008-09. Since all the appeals pertain to the same taxpayer and the issue involved in the appeals is common, for the sake of convenience, these appeals were heard together a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ddition of the entries found in the bank account. After initiating penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act, the assessing officer called for explanation. However, the legal representative of the taxpayer could not furnish any satisfactory explanation with regard to the credits found in the bank account. Therefore, the assessing officer has levied penalty for concealment of income. 3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he legal representative has not contested the addition. It does not mean that the taxpayer has earned unaccounted money. Since the taxpayer is no more and the legal representative was not in a position to explain the source of credit found in the bank account, according to the ld.representative, levy of penalty is not justified. Therefore, the Commissioner of Income-tax(A) has rightly deleted the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rm s funds. The factual situation could have been well explained before the assessing authority by the taxpayer himself. Unfortunately, the taxpayer is no more. Therefore, the legal representatives of the taxpayer were practically handicapped in explaining the real situation which resulted in credit of the amount in the bank account. In such a circumstance, we may not be able to blame the legal he ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
