TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (10) TMI 655
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of the Act. 2. Shri T.Banusekar represented on behalf of the Assessee and Shri AR.V.Sreenivasan represented on behalf of the Revenue. 3. It was submitted by ld.AR that the assessee is an individual, who is a partner in the firm M/s.Swarna Shilpi. The assessee is also manufacturer and trader in Gold jewellery. There was a search and seizure operation on 06.01.2011. In the course of search, the assessee was found with excess Gold jewellery of 27,645 grams. It was a further submission that the assessee had in the course of search admitted an undisclosed income on account is the said jewellery and had offered the entire Gold jewellery of 27,645 grams @ Rs. 1,450/- per gram amounting to Rs. 4,06,94,450/-. In the return of income filed on ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....st, if any, in respect of the undisclosed income. It was submitted that the Assessing Officer had taken the view that condition Nos. 2, 3 & 4 had not been complied with and consequently levy of penalty u/s.271AAA of the Act. The ld.AR drew our attention to the statement recorded u/s.132(4) of the Act which was shown at page-4 of the paper book wherein in reply to Question No.12. The assessee has mentioned as follows:- "Q.12. During the course of search & seizure operation today at your premise, we have found physical stock of gold of 192.646 Kgs. As per your stock register, your stock as on today is 154.377 Kgs. In this premise. Please explain the difference of stock of 38.269 Kgs available in this premise. Answer: We m....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at Conditions No.2 & 3 had been complied with. In the return filed, the 4th condition being payment of taxes together with the interest was also complied in so far as the assessee had adopted the rate of Rs. 1,450/- per gram, being the cost at which assessee had acquired the said jewellery. It was a submission that the rate of Rs. 1,850/- was the rate as on the date of search and obviously the undisclosed investments representing the gold jewellery was not purchased or acquired on the same date. It was submitted that the taxes in respect of the said undisclosed investments had also been paid before filing of the return for the relevant assessment year. It was thus a prayer that the penalty u/s.271AAA of the Act was not leviable in so far as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d and (iv) he should pay tax, together with interest, if any, in respect of the undisclosed income. Admittedly, there is no dispute in respect of the first condition, i.e. that the assessee has admitted the undisclosed income in the statement recorded u/s.132(4) of the Act in the course of search. Answer to Qn. No.13 as has been extracted above clearly shows that the assessee has substantiated the manner in which he has derived this income and he has substantiated the manner in which it was derived being the commission income from various commission businesses. Admittedly, no further question has also been asked to further probe or into the issue, as obviously, the search has revealed the various business incomes and source of income of the....