2012 (5) TMI 623

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....erefore, we proceeded to decide this appeal after hearing ld. D.R. 3. The revenue has taken following effective ground:- "The ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the penalty levied u/s 271AAA of Rs. 5,00,000/- even though the assessee failed to fulfill the conditions prescribed u/s 271AAA of the Act." 4. Brief facts of the case are that a search u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act was conducted at the premises of the assessee. During the course of search assessee had disclosed Rs. 50,00,000/- on account of unaccounted income which was shown by the assessee in his return of income filed for the year under consideration. The return income of Rs. 62,80,280/- which included Rs. 50,00,000/- disclosed by the assessee dur....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ut has to substantiate the manner in which income has been earned by him, hence, the burden cast on the assessee is much higher. The assessee failed to provide such details and therefore, these decisions are not applicable in assessee's case. It was further argued that assessee's case is not covered under the exemption provision of Section 271AAA(2) as the assessee does not meet the requirement of the exemption. He, therefore, concluded his argument that order passed by ld. CIT(A) may kindly be set aside and that of the A.O. be restored. 7. After hearing ld. D.R. and perusing the record we find that in this case a search operation took place at the premises of the assessee during which assessee declared unaccounted income of Rs. 50,00,00....