TMI Blog2022 (3) TMI 569X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ave concealed the income. The Court held that such revised return could not be treated as voluntary return and penalty under Section 271(1)(a) of the Act would be leviable. - Decided in favour of assessee. - R/Tax Appeal No. 129 of 2022 - - - Dated:- 31-1-2022 - HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA And HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE MR.VARUN K.PATEL ( 3802 ) FOR THE APPELLANT(S) NO. 1 ORDER ( PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. B. PARDIWALA ) 1. This appeal under Section-260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [for short 'The Act, 1961] is at the instance of the revenue and is directed against the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'A' Bench, Ahmedabad dated 2nd March 2021 in the ITA 2096/AHD/2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al while dismissing the appeal of the revenue recorded the following findings:- 7. On perusal of the above provision what is inferred is that, if the AO or the learned CIT(A) during any proceedings under this Act is satisfied that the assessee has concealed or furnish inaccurate particular of income then he/she may impose penalty. The provision of explanation-1 attached to the section also cover the situation; (a) where the assessee failed to offer an explanation or explanation offered found to be false with regard to any facts or material in the computation of income, or (b) where the assessee fails to substantiate the explanation offered and also failed to prove that such explanation is bona fide and has disclosed all the material fa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot find any reason to interfere in order of the learned CIT(A). Hence, the ground of appeal of the revenue is dismissed. 6. The questions of law as proposed by the revenue referred to above are no longer res-integra in view of the order passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-3 Vs. R. Umedbhai Jewellers Pvt. Ltd.; Tax Appeal No. 549 of 2016; decided on 22.08.2016. 7. We quote the relevant observations made by the Co-ordinate Bench in the Paragraphs-11 and 12 as under:- 11. The vital difference in the aforesaid case, thus, was that the assessee had already filed a return disclosing an amount of ₹ 16.17 lacs. It was only during the assessment proceedings that the asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
