9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (9) TMI 590X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ,54,88,542/-. 4. Returned income was assessed at Rs. 4,74,19,927/- after making addition on account of peak credit balance in HSBC Bank of Rs. 18,58,311/- and Rs. 73,074/- on account of accrued interest. Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act were separately initiated. 5. The Assessing Officer imposed penalty holding that income of Rs. 2,23,68,002/- was not declared in the original return of income filed u/s 139 of the Act. Further, addition made on account of HSBC deposit and interest thereon were also subjected to levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. 6. After giving thoughtful consideration to the aforestated facts, at the very outset, we are of the opinion that once income is returned in the return filed u/s 153A of the Act, then the return filed u/s 139 of the Act gets superseded by the return filed u/s 153A of the Act, which means that any initiation of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act should be based on the assessed income u/s 153A of the Act qua the return filed. In our considered opinion, the returned income u/s 139 of the Act should not be considered in initiating penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act qua the assessment made u/s 153A of the Act. 7. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... From the above cases it would be clear that when an assessee has filed revised returns after search has been conducted, and such revised return has been accepted by the A.O., then merely by virtue of the fact that such return showed a higher income, penalty under Section 271(1)(c) cannot be automatically imposed. 19. The whole matter can be examined from a different perspective as well. Section 153A provides the procedure for completion of assessment where a search is initiated under Section 132 or books of account, or other documents or any assets are requisitioned under Section 132A after 31.05.2003. In such cases, the Assessing Officer shall issue notice to such person requiring him to furnish, within such period as may be specified in the notice, return of income in respect of six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which the search was conducted under Section 132 or requisition was made under Section 132A. The Assessing Officer shall assess or reassess the total income of each of these six assessment years. Assessment or reassessment, if any, relating to any assessment year falling within the period of six assessment ye ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d in response to notice under s. 153A of the I.T. Act is to be considered as return filed under s. 139 of the Act, as the AO has made assessment on the said return and therefore, the return is to be considered for the purpose of penalty under s. 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act and the penalty is to be levied on the income assessed over and above the income returned under s. 153A, if any." 21. Thus, it is clear that when the A.O. has accepted the revised return filed by the assessee under Section 153A, no occasion arises to refer to the previous return filed under Section 139 of the Act. For all purposes, including for the purpose of levying penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act, the return that has to be looked at is the one filed under Section 153A. In fact, the second proviso to Section 153A(1) provides that "assessment or reassessment, if any, relating to any assessment year falling within the period of six assessment years referred to in this sub-section pending on the date of initiation of the search under Section 132 or making of requisition under Section 132A, as the case may be, shall abate." What is clear from this is that Section 153A is in the nature of a second chance ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... here should not be any quarrel to bifurcate the disclosed amount in two A.Ys when tax rate in both the A.Ys is the same and there is no loss to the revenue. We are of the considered view that the revenue authorities should desist from such litigation. 27. Considering the facts of the case in totality, as discussed hereinabove, as culled out from the records, and the relevant documentary evidences, we do not find any merit in bifurcating the income in two A.Ys when the assessee has paid taxes in A.Y 2007- 08. Making the addition of same income in two A.Ys definitely amounts to double taxation. We, accordingly direct the Assessing Officer to delete the addition in A.Y. 2006.07 amounting to Rs. 2,05,50, 550/- and Rs. 18,58,311.00 in F.Y 2007-08 also. Accordingly, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos. 6269 and 6268/DEL/2017 are allowed. 28. Now we will address to the appeals of the revenue. 29. In ITA No 6648/Dell/2017, the revenue has raised two issues. One is relating to deletion of addition of Rs. 18,58,311/- made by the Assessing Officer under section 69 of the Act on account of difference appeared in peak balances in bank account maintained with HSBC, Geneva and second gro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
