2013 (2) TMI 291

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act and the penalty levied by the Assessment Officer was unjustified. Aggrieved by the judgment and order of the Tribunal, the Revenue has come up in appeal. 2. Mr. Sinha, learned Advocate appearing in support of the appeal submitted that the Assessee would not have disclosed the income, had the search not taken place. Therefore, the fact that the Assessee has sought to defraud the Revenue is self evident, and therefore, the decision holding that the Assessee is immune from penal provision is altogether bad. 3. Mr. Poddar, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the Assessee respondent submitted that under Section 271 of the Income Tax Act penalty can be imposed provided the Assessee does not come within the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....me was derived has also been disclosed and the assessee has thereafter paid the tax and the applicable interest. Mr.Poddar, therefore, submitted that all the requirements for operation of the clause of Explanation-5 quoted above were fulfilled. Therefore, the Tribunal had no option but to allow the immunity provided for by the legislature from the penal provision under section 271 of the Income Tax Act. He also drew our attention to the division bench judgment of the Madras High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. S.D.V Chandru reported in (2004) 266 ITR 175 wherein following views were expressed.     "In cases where the assessee had not disclosed his income in the returns filed for the previous year which ....