Purposive interpretation of residential house exemption: unregistered purchase agreement alone does not defeat relief, but investment must be verified...
Penalty under section 271AAC was upheld because the Tribunal found that the quantum addition for unexplained investment had already been conclusively sustained on incriminating digital material and could not be reopened in penalty proceedings. It held that section 271AAC applies where income is determined under section 115BBE, and the statutory immunity is unavailable unless the income is disclosed in the return and tax is paid within the prescribed time, which was not done. The Tribunal further held that the word "may" requires judicial discretion, but where unexplained investment is established and no bona fide explanation or reasonable cause is shown, penalty follows as the natural legal consequence.
Penalty under section 271AAC was upheld because the Tribunal found that the quantum addition for unexplained investment had already been conclusively sustained on incriminating digital material and could not be reopened in penalty proceedings. It held that section 271AAC applies where income is determined under section 115BBE, and the statutory immunity is unavailable unless the income is disclosed in the return and tax is paid within the prescribed time, which was not done. The Tribunal further held that the word "may" requires judicial discretion, but where unexplained investment is established and no bona fide explanation or reasonable cause is shown, penalty follows as the natural legal consequence.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
