TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (7) TMI 807
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....alf of the assessee. It is noted that notice was served by registered post. On earlier occasions also many dates have been fixed, but none has attended on behalf of the assessee despite the fact that on all the dates notices were duly served on the address given in the appeal memo filed by the assessee. Ld. Departmental Representative for the Revenue made the arguments on the basis of material on record. Under these circumstances, we have no option but to proceed ex parte qua the assessee. 3. The solitary issue raised in this appeal is with regard to penalty of Rs. 41,71,188 levied by the Assessing Officer on the amount of cash paid by the assessee for acquisition of shops out of undisclosed sources. 4. The brief facts noted from the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....enalty are reproduced below: "a. During the course of search action under s. 132 on the premises of the partner Shri Laxmichand Rohira on 08.08.2007, loose papers numbering 14 to 31 kept in loose paper folder Annexure A (page 1 to 6) were found and seized. These papers contained certain figures aggregating to Rs. 3,44,02,000/- (refer page 14) and Rs. 1,97,89,286/- (refer page 20) against each of the partner on their profit sharing ratio. All the pages numbering 14 to 21 were written in the same handwriting. b. A close examination of the seized papers numbering from 14 t021 will reveal that page no. 14 is the summarizing paper from page no. 15 to 17 and the same is related to figure of Rs. 3,44,02,000/- which is added in the hands o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ures in the books of account. Therefore a reasonable and logical conclusion that can be drawn is that the appellant in fact has no quarrel with the finings of the A.O that the notings in page 20 refer to the figures as appearing in the books of accounts, and which are agreed to be payments made through cheque. Hence what is to be examined is the notings as per pages 14 to 17, which, according to the A.O, represents the cash component of the Rs. 3,44,02,000/-. According to the appellant, the A.O misinterpreted "c" written on page 14 as "cash" which in fact is "confirmation". As per the appellant, the notings at page 14 to 17 are with reference to a proposed project for acquiring additional office/shop premises and that they give the likely c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t to be "projections". The said explanation of the appellant belies logic. The explanation as given by the appellant is unacceptable in the given facts and circumstances. The appellant has offered an explanation which he has not been able to substantiate. When the appellant fails to substantiate the explanation, the provisions of Explanation 1 to section 271(1)(c) are applicable. 6. The appellant has raised a ground that the AO has heavily relied on the findings in the quantum assessment without bringing any direct or cogent evidence on record. 6.1 I have considered the said issue raised. It is to be stated that certainly quantum assessment does not automatically trigger the levy of penalty. Penalty proceedings are separate and distin....