2003 (1) TMI 28

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hort "the Act"), is directed against the order dated December 28, 2001, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi, in IA No. 6468/Delhi of 1995 pertaining to the assessment year 1992-93, affirming the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), New Delhi. The Commissioner (Appeals) has deleted the penalty levied on the assessee under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. Brie....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... on November 5, 1993, declaring an income of Rs. 5,04,380 was revised by including the aforenoted amount of Rs. 8,00,000, surrendered during the course of search. On July 22, 1992, assessment was completed on the basis of the revised return, which included the aforenoted amount of Rs. 8,00,000. Since the Assessing Officer was of the view that the assessee had concealed the particulars of its incom....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y, learned senior standing counsel for the Revenue. Strenuously urged by Mr. Jolly that the alleged surrender by the assessee during the course of search on July 22, 1992, cannot be that the assessee is not entitled to claim the benefit of the aforenoted Explanation inasmuch as the surrender on behalf of the assessee of the aforenoted amount was after the detection of concealed income by the searc....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rrender of the aforenoted amount of Rs. 8,00,000 was made on the date of the search itself and such a surrender falls within immunity of Explanation 5 to section 271(1)(c) of the Act. From the order of the Assessing Officer levying penalty, it is correct that there is no dispute that the statement of the assessee was recorded on the very first day. It is pertinent to note that in respect of the ot....