AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (6) TMI 73
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in law and on facts in cancelling the penalty imposed u/s. 271AAA on unexplained cash payments offered as additional income amounting to Rs. 30,00,00,000/- whereas the assessee did not substantiate the manner in which this undisclosed income was derived in view of the provisions o f section 271AAA(2)(ii) of the I.T. Act, 1961. 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in cancelling the penalty u/s. 271AAA whereas the conditions laid down in the I.T. Act, 1961 have not been fulfilled. 3. That the order of the CIT(A) is perverse, erroneous and is not tenable on facts and in law. 4. That the grounds of appeal are without prejudice to each other. 5. Th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Howrah. These documents contained details of cash payments made to various parties for acquisition of land. These documents when confronted, the assessee had offered the amount of Rs. 30 crore as undisclosed income and the same was declared in the return of income filed for which the source and manner of deriving such undisclosed income could not be explained. Hence, the quantum of penalty was computed @10% of the amount of disclosure at Rs. 30 Crores and penalty of Rs. 3 crore u/s. 271AAA of the Act was imposed vide order dated 24.9.2014. 3. Against the penalty order, Assessee appealed before the Ld. CIT(A), who in turn elaborately considered the submissions of the assessee, impugned penalty order, the assessment order and statements r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Paper Book which is the detail of disclosure of Rs. 30 crores in assessment year 2012-13 i.e. assessment year in dispute. He further stated that Ld. CIT(A) in para no. 4.4 of the impugned order has carefully considered the written submissions, oral arguments and the other documentary evidences filed by the assessee and rightly deleted the penalty in dispute by holding that since no specific query was raised at the time of recording the statement u/s. 132(4) of the Act and during the course of assessment proceedings, the manner was substantiated by filing the written submissions and also referring the relevant documents relating to undisclosed income, which were found and seized and also rightly held that assessee is not at fault for subst....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ench in the case of Sita Ram Gupta vs. ACIT : ITA No. 1835 & 1836 of 2013. - Decision of Delhi, ITAT, in the case of ACIT vs. Sh. Sandeep Yadav ITA No. 6551/Del/2013. 7. We have heard both the parties and perused the records especially the assessment order; penalty order and the impugned order as well as the statement recorded u/s. 132(4) of the Act and the case laws relied by both the parties, especially the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court decisions referred by the Ld. Counsel of the assessee in the cases of Pr. CIT (Central-1) vs. M/s Emirates Technologies Pvt. Ltd. ITA No. 400/2017 and Pr. CIT, Central-I vs. Sandeep Gupta ITA No. 967/2017. However, the case laws relied upon the Ld. DR are on distinguished facts, because the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., papers and correspondence was also found and seized. The breakup of the disclosure of Rs. 30 crore was also submitted before the AO vide letter dated 25.3.2014 which states as under:- a) On the basis of loose paper seized : Rs.13,32,11,768/- b) Cash deposited into PNB : Rs.16,00,00,000/- c) Other (based on seized paper) : Rs. 67,88,232/- Total : Rs. 30,00,00,000/- 7.2 We further observe that since no specific query was raised at the time of recording statement u/s. 132(4) and during the assessment proceedings, however, the manner was substantiated by filing written submission and also referring relevant documents relating to undisclosed income, which were found and seized. Therefore, the Ld....