Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2022 (6) TMI 1007

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ad not disclosed this income in his original return of income but even in the statement recorded u/s 132(4) of the Act, he had given evasive reply regarding the actual investment made in the hotel project. Therefore, at no stretch of imagination, the disclosure could be termed as voluntary. It is also to be noted that before us, she had only made a plea that the Ld. CIT(A) has already deleted the quantum addition and no penalty could be levied. However, she has not put any argument with regard to the above finding of the Ld. CIT(A). Since she has not made any argument on the above issue, and also lower authorities have not considered any deleted additions for levy of penalty, there is no merit in the argument of assessee s counsel that n .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he Act' for short]. 2. Facts of the case are that assessee filed original return of income for assessment year 2016-17 on 5.8.2016 disclosing total income of Rs.8,26,030/-. The same was processed under section 143(1) of the Act. There was search in the case of assessee u/s 132 of the Act on 1.2.2017 at the business premises of M/s. Badagubettu Credit Co-operative Society Limited, Udupi. The present assessee is the General Manager of this Society. During the course of search action, certain documents were seized from his chamber at the premises of Badagubettu Credit Co-operative Society Ltd. At the same time, residence of the assessee was searched u/s 132 of the Act on 1.2.2017 and statements were recorded from him u/s 132(4) of the A .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... claration has been reduced by claiming deduction under section 57 such as loans from Badagabettu Co-op. Society Ltd. vide account No.CCL/S5 and CCL/S 6 amounting to Rs.40,00,000/- and Rs.2,00,00,000/- respectively and interest paid on said loan from Badagabettu Coop. Society Ltd. I hold that, the unexplained investment brought to tax under section 69A in the preceding assessment year 2015-16 amounting to Rs.1,30,00,000/-, I have deleted the said additions made by my order in ITA No.100/CIT(A)-2/18-19 of even date. Accordingly, interest paid on such loans during the assessment year under question should be allowed as deduction. Hence, I direct the AO to consider the above claim of the appellant as disclosed in the revised return of income fi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) of IT Act (in respect of quantum addition already deleted by ITAT in aforesaid order dated 22.12.2020 in ITA No.3152/Del/2018) is hereby cancelled. Accordingly, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. Order was already orally pronounced in the open court on 25.3.2021 after conclusion of the hearing in the presence of representatives of both sides. Now this order in writing is signed today on 30.3.2021. 4. In view of the above order of the Tribunal, she prayed that penalty may be deleted. 5. Ld. D.R. not put any serious objection. 6. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. Admittedly, the Ld. CIT(A) already deleted the quantum addition made by the AO in th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he income declared by the assessee is based on entry in books of accounts/other documents pertaining to any previous year which commenced before the date of search and return of income has been filed before search but such income was not declared then, even if the assessee declared such income in the return of income filed after search, he will be deemed to have concealment/furnished inaccurate particular of income. It has to be noted that not only the appellant had not disclosed this income in his original return of income but even in the statement recorded u/s 132(4) of the Act, he had given evasive reply regarding the actual investment made in the hotel project. Therefore, at no stretch of imagination, the disclosure could be termed as v .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates