2011 (9) TMI 733

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....me Tax Appellate Tribunal ('Tribunal' for short) was justified in deleting the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) is the question raised in this appeal.   2. The assessment year involved herein is AY 1996-97.   3. In the present case, the assessee had filed return of income on 24th June 1996 declaring income of Rs.17,00,000/as long ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....and the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was upheld by the Tribunal. Thus, the amount of Rs.17,00,000/represented the undisclosed income of the assessee has attained finality. The undisclosed income has been assessed under the head 'income from other sources' and taxed at 30%.   5. Thereafter, penalty proceedings were initiated and the assessing officer imposed 200% penalt....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....S Pharmaceuticals reported in (2011) 335 ITR 259 (Delhi), counsel for the assessee submitted that in the absence of any additions made in the assessment order, merely because the claim made by the assessee for assessment under one head is rejected by the assessing officer and the said income is assessed under some other head, then the imposition of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act is not....