2016 (7) TMI 55

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....and a search operation was carried out under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act at the business and residential premises on 12/01/1999 and during the said search operation, gold weighing 28,116 Kg valued at Rs. 1,24,85,982/- was recovered from the residence of respondent and were dug out from the courtyard of the residence. Thereafter, notice under Section 158BC of the Act was issued and respondentassessee filed the return of undisclosed income declaring undisclosed income of Rs. 13,75,334/- for the block period i.e. Assessment year 1989-90 to 1998-99 and upto 12/01/1999. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment and determined the undisclosed income at Rs. 3,97,51,081/- by an order dated 31/01/2001. 2.1 The respondentassessee preferre....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d circumstances of the case and in law, the Appellate Tribunal is justified in deleting the penalty of Rs. 25,29,100/- levied under Section 158BFA (2) of the Act holding that the addition is justified but no case exists for levy of penalty." 4. Learned Counsel for the appellant has submitted that the ITAT has wrongly interpreted the provisions of law and ought to have entertained the appeal preferred by the Department. He has further contended that the AO has rightly come to the conclusion that it has been established that the assessee did not disclose the true and correct income by not filing the regular return of income and further the assessee has never filed his return of income and therefore the penalty proceedings under Section 158B....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....alty u/s. 271(c) similar expression is interpreted by the Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs. Noorjahan (237ITR570) as giving discretion to the Assessing Officer to levy or not to levy the penalty on proper evaluation of the relevant facts. 6.2 The relevant fact is that the appellant was found in possession of gold bars, writs watches an Indian currency valued at Rs. 40,34,898/- by the Customs department and that in response to the show cause notice for explaining the source of investment in the above items confiscated by the Customs department the appellant made a declaration offering the entire amount as unexplained investment. The appellant has not concealed and was in no position to conceal the relevant facts. However, in the return of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n the joint account of several persons. The addition is made without any discussion in the regard. Regarding the vehicles it is seen that the assessee had declared the two twowheelers as his unaccounted assets. The difference of opinion between the appellant and the Assessing Officer is in respect of the value of the investment. It cannot be said that the appellant had filed inaccurate particulars about these vehicles. The unaccounted loans of Rs. 34,000/- and the interest thereon is claimed by the appellant as included in the declaration of the undisclosed income of Rs. 1,39,75,334/- in the return for the block period. In my opinion, it cannot be said that these additions are on account of detection by the Assessing Officer of information ....