2014 (8) TMI 873

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Rs. 1,33,400/- for Assessment Year 1991-92 and Rs. 3,88,700/- for Assessment Year 1992-93 levied by Assessing Officer u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. 3. We heard the rival submissions and perused the orders of lower authorities and material available on record. In the instant case, the assessee filed its return of income disclosing income of Rs. 31,880/- in Assessment Year 1991-92 and Rs. 36,880/- in Assessment Year 1992-93. Thereafter, it was found on investigation by the Department that the assessee was having certain bank accounts which were not disclosed to the Department. Accordingly, the peak balance in the undisclosed bank accounts were treated as income of the assessee. 4. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment by determin....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the six bank accounts out of which five bank accounts were voluntarily disclosed by the assessee and therefore, penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) should not have been levied in respect of income assessed on the basis of those five bank accounts. 10. The Departmental Representative supported the orders of lower authorities. 11. We find that it is not in dispute that the six bank accounts with reference to which addition was made by the Assessing Officer were not disclosed by the assessee in its return of income. The source of deposit in the said bank accounts could not be explained by the assessee. In the above circumstances, the addition of peak balance in the said bank accounts cannot be held as an addition made merely on estimate basis withou....