TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (5) TMI 347
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rming the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'). 2. Shri S. Sridhar, the Ld.counsel for the assessee, submitted that there was a survey in the premises of the assessee on 06.08.2013. The assessee voluntarily filed revised return declaring a total income of Rs. 15,93,50,630/- and the same was accepted by the Assessing Officer without any further addition except a small disallowance of Rs. 5,43,708/- under Section 40A(2)(a) of the Act. According to the Ld. counsel, the Assessing Officer levied penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. Referring to the judgment of Delhi High Court in CIT v. SAS Pharmaceuticals in ITA No.1058 of 2009 dated 08.04.2011, the Ld....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d that the concealment of particulars of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of such income has to be in the return filed by the assessee. In this case, according to the Ld. counsel, the return filed by the assessee under Section 139(5) of the Act, was very much accepted by the Assessing Officer without making any further addition. Even for disallowance made under Section 40A(3) of the Act, the particulars are very much available on record. Merely because the Assessing Officer disallowed under Section 40A(3) of the Act in view of the statutory provision, it cannot be said that the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars or concealed any part of its income. Therefore, according to the Ld. counsel, it is not a case for levy o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....enalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act which was also confirmed by the CIT(Appeals). 7. We have considered the rival submissions on either side and perused the relevant material available on record. The assessee is engaged in the business of gold covering and fancy items. There was a survey in the premises of the assessee under Section 133A of the Act on 06.08.2013 and the assessee filed the revised return under Section 139(5) of the Act declaring total income of Rs. 15,93,50,630/-. During the course of survey operation, it appears the Revenue authorities found that the assessee-company did not account for a part of its business turnover. The Revenue authorities have also found that the assessee generated unaccounted income by way of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... reject the contention of the learned counsel for the Revenue relying upon the expression 'in the course of any proceedings under this Act' occurring in sub-section (1) of Section 271 of the Act and contending that even during survey when it was found that the assessee had concealed the particular of his income, it would amount concealment in the course of 'any proceedings'. The words 'in the course of any proceedings under this Act' are prefaced by the satisfaction of the A.O. or the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). When the survey is conducted by a survey team, the question of satisfaction of A.O. or the Commissioner (Appeals) or the Commissioner does not arise. We have to keep in mind that it is the A.O. who initiated the penalty pr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the Act and the same was accepted by the Assessing Officer, this Tribunal found that there cannot be any levy of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. 8. It is an admitted fact that the assessee has filed revised return of income under Section 139(5) of the Act voluntarily disclosing all the income earned during the year under consideration. Other than the statutory disallowance of Rs. 5,43,708/- under Section 40A(2)(a) of the Act, the entire income disclosed by the assessee was accepted without any further addition. When the assessee has filed revised return within the statutory period, under Section 139(5) of the Act, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that it cannot be said that the assessee has concealed any part of in....