AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (7) TMI 713
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..../- being unsustainable needs deletion. 2. That as source of Rs. 80,000/- is well explained during assessment proceedings, penalty u/s 271AAB on it amounting to Rs. 24,000/- also being not leviable needs deletion." 2. Regarding Ground No. 1, the ld AR drawn our reference to the findings of the Assessing in the assessment order passed u/s 143(3) r/w 153A dated 29.01.2016 which read as under:- "7. Undisclosed income admitted and declared in the return of income During the course of post search proceedings, the assessee had admitted an income of Rs. 6,00,000/- on A/c of undisclosed investment in Land as per documents seized from residence of Shri B.D. Mundra at 524A, Talwandi, Kota and inventorised as Exhibit-13, P....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....AO, it is clear that the penalty proceedings have only been initiated in the context of income of Rs. 80,000/- brought to tax u/s 69B of the Act and as far as the income of Rs. 5.20 lakh offered by the assessee in the revised return e- filed on 09.11.2013, the penalty proceedings were not initiated. It was accordingly submitted that the penalty so levied by the AO u/s 271AAB therefore deserves to be deleted. 4. Regarding the penalty levied by the AO on addition of Rs. 80,000/- made u/s 69B of the Act, our reference was drawn to the working of investment in the Industrial Land as per revised return of income as under: Cash available as on 31.03.2013 Rs. 82,561 Add: Undisclosed income Rs. 5,20,000 Rs. 6,02,561 L....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....08.2013, the assessee is liable for penalty u/s 271AAB of the Act. It was further submitted that given that the assessee has originally admitted undisclosed income of Rs. 6,00,000/-, only additional of Rs. 5.20 lakh was offered in the revised return, balance addition of Rs. 80,000/- was made during the course of assessment proceedings. It was accordingly submitted that the penalty proceedings u/s 271AAB were initiated for the whole of the undisclosed income of Rs. 6,00,000/- and it is incorrect on the part of the ld. AR to state that the penalty has been initiated only in relation to the additional income of Rs. 80,000/- brought to tax by the Assessing Officer. Further, our reference was drawn to the findings of the ld CIT(A) which read as ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (A) pays the tax, together with interest, if any, in respect of the undisclosed income; and (B) furnishes the return of income for the specified previous year declaring such undisclosed income therein. 6.6 The assessee has laid much stress on the fact that out of the income of Rs. 6,00,000/- in respect of which penalty u/s 271AAB has been levied, income of Rs. 5,20,000/- was offered to tax in the return of income filed before issue of notice u/s 153A. There is no dispute about this fact, and therefore in respect of the income of Rs. 5,20,000/-, which was declared in the ROI filed before issue of notice u/s 153A, the assessee satisfies the condition "(iii)" above. However, at no stage, including in the present appellate p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the contention so advanced by the ld AR. The sum and substance of para 7 of the assessment order where read in totality will show clearly that the penalty has been initiated in respect of Rs. 6,00,000/- admitted by the assessee pursuant to search conducted on 13.08.2013. Given that the assessee had only disclosed a sum of Rs. 5.2 lacs in the revised return filed on 9.11.2013, subsequent to date of search and thereafter, in the return filed on 16.02.2015 in response to notice u/s 153A, the Assessing officer has brought the balance amount of Rs. 80,000/- to tax during the course of assessment proceedings. However, as far as initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271AAB is concerned, the same has been initiated on the whole of the sum of Rs. 6 ....