2018 (1) TMI 1071

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....gned orders dated 14.05.2015 passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Dehradun affirming the penalty orders dated 25.09.2013 passed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'), qua the assessment years 2005-06, 2007- 08 & 2008-09 on the common ground, except the difference in penalty amount, that :- "That the learned Commissioner (Appeals) erred on the facts and circumstances of the appellant's case in confirming the impugned penalty (Rs.24,200/-, Rs. 1,26,300/- & Rs. 95,000/- for AYs 2005-06, 2007-08 & 2008-09 respectively) imposed by the learned AO under section 271(1)(c) of the Act on the appellant." 3. Briefly stated the facts necessary for adjudication of the controversy at hand are : The ass....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ffirmed the penalty by dismissing the appeals. Feeling aggrieved, the assessee has come up before the Tribunal by challenging the impugned orders passed by ld. CIT (A). 6. Assessee has not preferred to put in appearance despite issuance of the notice and consequently, we proceeded to decide the present appeal with the assistance of the ld. DR as well as on the basis of documents available on the file. 7. We have heard the ld. Departmental Representative for the revenue to the appeal, gone through the documents relied upon and orders passed by the revenue authorities below in the light of the facts and circumstances of the case. 8. Assessee has taken defence for under-reporting of his income before the ld. CIT (A) that at the time of fili....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....en the surrendered income as concealed without appreciating the fact that remaining income recorded in the diary has already been reported in the return of income by the assessee already filed in this case. In such circumstances, assessee has to rely on his accountant to report all the details in the return of income and it is a "reasonable and sufficient cause" to delete the penalty. Even ld. CIT (A) also proceeded to affirm the penalty on the surmise that the income has been surrendered by the assessee when he was confronted by the AO with the diary in its notice u/s 153A(1)(a) of the Act. 11. More so, Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad in case of CIT vs. Mohan Lal Sharma - (2005) 149 taxman 6 (All.) also held that merely because of the fac....