TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (8) TMI 179
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....herein it was a common stand of the parties that the arguments advanced in ITA 27/CHD/2019 would cover identical issues in each of the appeals. 2. In the respective appeals, the assessees are challenging near identical orders of the CIT(A)-2 Jalandhar wherein by an order passed u/s 154, the earlier order passed by the CIT(A) was rectified. The said mistake in each of these appeals was pointed out by the AO and recording this fact in para 2 of the order on an identical reasoning on facts for the reasons set out in para 4 to 4.9, the CIT(A) has held that penalty @ 30% as levied by the AO invoking clause (c) of Section 271AAB(1) is upheld. 3. Accordingly, in the said background, the grounds raised in ITA 27/CHD/2019 are reproduced hereun....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... impugned order, it was submitted that the surrender was on account of business transactions etc. not recorded in the regular books of account. Inviting attention to para 4.5 of the order, it was submitted that the CIT(A) has recorded that, "The appellant has further stated that this additional income was offered on the grounds that no penalty would be imposed. The reply of the assessee was considered but not found tenable by the AO. As per the AO, the assessee has only staled that surrendered income was offered but it was not declared in the return of income by the due date and has not substantiated the manner and mode of earning the income neither during search nor in the course of penalty proceedings." Accordingly, it was argued that on ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ee, it is seen has mistakenly relied upon the statements allegedly given at the time of surrender that the surrender is made on the understanding that no penalty would be visited upon him on account of the surrender made. It goes without saying that no such discretion or powers have been vested upon the tax authorities by the Income Tax Act. Any such belief entertained by the assessee has no legal sanction. Accordingly, it is seen that such explanation offered at the appellate stage and re-iterated before us has to be discarded. The fact which emanates is that admittedly an effective opportunity of being heard has not been exercised by the assessee on account of the mis-conceptions entertained and mistaken belief. Section 271AAB of the A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in the books of account or other documents maintained in the normal course relating to the specified previous year which is found to be false and would not have been found to be so had the search not been conducted.] 7.2 On a perusal of the above, it is evident that the Section is self-contained when these are considered alongwith the statutory mandate as set out in clauses (a); (b) and (c) of sub-section (1) of Section 271AAB there can be no doubt that there is no discretion with the AO as the parameters by which the AO or the tax authorities are bound in regard to the rate of penalty and the circumstances on the basis of which the penal provision can be said to be attracted is self explanatory. The Statute further in terms of sub-sect....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ity the remand be made as necessarily the statement recorded at the time of the search and the documents confronted and any other relevant fact would be required to be addressed which led to the surrender being made so as to address "undisclosed income". The ld.-DRs made a request that the matter may be remanded to the AO as he shall be in a better position to confront the material to the assessee. The ld. AR agreed that he shall address his arguments within the parameters of the powers vested with the tax authorities. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside back to the file of the AO with the direction to pass a speaking order in accordance with law after giving the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessee ....