2017 (5) TMI 1418
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... a common order is passed for the sake of convenience. 2. The facts as emanated from AY 2011-12 are that the assessee is a proprietor of M/s L.N. Motors, Mahabubnagar and is dealing in trading of autorikshaws and spare parts. Assessee filed his return of income for AY 2011-12 on 30/09/2011 declaring total income of Rs. 49,79,920/-, which was processed u/s 143(1) of the IT Act and subsequently the case was selected for scrutiny under CASS. 2.1 During the scrutiny proceedings, the AO asked the assessee to furnish bills and vouchers for the expenditure debited to P&L A/c in respect of his business places at Mahabubnagar and at Bellari and the details of accounts maintained in ING Vysya Bank, Axis Bank and HDFC Bank. In response, the assessee....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 350 Kms. I depended upon agents, Salesman, accountants and other staff members to run my business. I have to frequently move from one business place to the other to run the business which effected my health and caused mental worry and tension. As soon as. I found omissions in the original return, i.e during assessment proceedings for the assessment year 2011-2012, I filed true and correct particulars of Bank transactions and other incomes like. Bank interest etc., voluntarily in my letter dated 27- 12-2013 for the assessment year 2011-2012 as well as for the previous assessment years 2008-2009, 2009-2010, 2010-2011 and also for the subsequent assessment years 2012-2013." 2.4 After considering the said explanation, the AO observed that th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....est income as well as certain miscellaneous income in the return of income filed and, therefore, it is a clear cut case of concealment of income. Therefore, penalty levied by the AO is proper and the same may be upheld. She relied on the decision the case of MAK Data (P.) Ltd. Vs. CIT, 358 ITR 593. 6. Considered the rival submissions and perused the material facts on record as well as the decisions cited. It is observed that the AO has initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) on the ground that the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of income and but for the selection of the case for scrutiny the undisclosed income of the assessee would not have seen the light of the day. Accordingly, the net cash deposits disclosed by the as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... or offers explanation which is found to be false, then the penalty will follow as prescribed under sub-clause (iii) of clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 271. Where the assessee offers an explanation and substantiate the explanation, the question of imposing penalty would not arise. Even in cases where he fails to substantiate the explanation but if he proves that the explanation offered is a bona fide one and all the facts relating to the same and material to the computation of his total income as been disclosed by him, then, in law, a discretion is vested with the authority not to impose penalty. In other words, if the assessee offers explanation but fails to substantiate the same, but if he proves that explanation offered is bonaf....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....see while submitting its return, failed to add the provision for gratuity to its total income. This can only be described as a human error which we are all prone to make. The calibre and expertise of the assessee has little or nothing to do with the inadvertent error. That the assessee should have been careful cannot be doubted, but the absence of due care, in a case such as the present, does not mean that the assessee is guilty of either furnishing inaccurate particulars or attempting to conceal its income. 6.2.1 In the present case, the assessee has disclosed all the particulars before completion of the assessment u/s 143(3), though the details were filed in the scrutiny proceeding. Further, scrutiny assessment proceedings have taken for....