TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2008 (3) TMI 422
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the court was delivered by 1. C. N. Ramachandran Nair J.- This is a reference at the instance of the Revenue against the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal cancelling penalty levied on the assessee under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 1990-91. The respondent is an advocate and power of attorney holder of the assessee by name M. K. Ali. A search was ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ealment of income by virtue of operation of Explanation 5 to section 271(1)© of the Act. However, he limited the penalty levied under section 271(1)© of the Act to the minimum amount. Even though the assessee filed an appeal against the penalty order, the same was rejected by the first appellate authority, namely, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). However, on second appeal by the assesse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the assessee in the course of search could have saved penalty by accounting the income at least on the date of search and then paid tax by declaring it. Even after search and seizure of cash by the Department, the assessee proceeded to contend that the amount belonged to another person, but failed to prove the same. Even though counsel for the assessee relied on the decisions of the Supreme Court ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....planation that it belonged to another person which the assessee could not establish or prove. In the circumstances, concealment stands proved beyond any doubt by operation of the presumption available under Explanation 5 to section 271(1)© of the Act and, consequently, the assessee is liable for penalty under the said section. Therefore the order of the Tribunal to the contrary is liable to be re....