9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (10) TMI 243X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) concerning AY 1994-95. 2. The captioned appeal has been filed by the assessee against the imposition of penalty under s. 271(1)(c) of the Act on unexplained cash credit of Rs. 1,90,000/-. 3. Briefly stated, the quantum assessment for AY 1994-95 in question was finalized under s.143(3) of the Act. The assessed income inter alia included a sum of Rs. 1,90,000/- tax as unexplained credit. The assessee contested addition made to the return income before the CIT(A) on the aforesaid amount without any success. 4. The assessee preferred appeal before the Tribunal against the aforesaid order of the CIT(A) in quantum proceedings but was dismissed in limine owing to non-representation from the assessee. In view of the ad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ns AY 1994-95 and therefore, he is in possession of very limited information. The learned AR further submitted that while the assessee could not establish the source of cash deposit in the quantum proceedings as held by various authorities, nevertheless, the matter requires to be looked afresh for the purpose of imposition of penalty under s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. It was submitted by the learned AR that the aforesaid amount actually represented the share application money received from some of the shareholders to whom the shares were actually issued. On being inquired by the Bench however, the learned AR could not establish the aforesaid assertion. A further inquiry was made as to whether such stand was taken at any stage before the lower a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... site inquiry. In view of the indifferent behavior, we proceed to dispose of the appeal on the basis of submissions made by the assessee before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) has reproduced the submissions made by the assessee as per para 2.1 of its order. We do not find anything substantive to rebut the allegation of cash deposits of Rs. 1,90,000/- in aggregate as an explained. The CIT(A) has also observed that assessee has failed to explain the source of cash deposit. Nothing has been brought on record before the Tribunal to rebut the aforesaid findings of the CIT(A). We thus see no reason to interfere with the order of the CIT(A) confirming the penalty of the aforesaid amount. 9. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. This Or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
