TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (4) TMI 590
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eals)-29, New Delhi {CIT(A)} for Assessment Year 2012-13 whereas ITA No.7862/Del/2017 is the Department's appeal against order dated 12.10.2017 passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-29, New Delhi {CIT(A)} for Assessment Year 2012-13, wherein the Ld. CIT(A) has deleted the penalty of Rs. 45,46,111/- imposed u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called 'the Act'). 2.0 The brief facts of the case are that during the year, the assessee had declared his income from salary and income from other sources. The original return was filed on 31.07.2012 declaring an income of Rs. 83,71,100/-. A search and seizure action u/s 132 of the Act was carried out in this case on 20.01.2012 and during the course of search,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fter, the Assessing Officer proceeded to compute interest income from these four Bank Accounts for the year under consideration at Rs. 1,47,12,333.41. This amount was added to the income of the assessee u/s 69 of the Act as undisclosed interest income. Penalty proceedings for concealment of particulars of income and/or filing inaccurate particulars of such income were also initiated. Apart from this undisclosed cash found at 2nd Floor, 2nd Floor, Indra Prakash Building, 21 Barakhamba Road, New Delhi found during the course of search was also added to the income of the assessee and assessment was completed u/s143(3) of the Act. 2.1 Aggrieved, the assessee approached the Ld. CIT(A) who deleted the addition pertaining to interest by followi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....port of his contention to the contrary viz to whom this cash belongs. 3. That the ground of appeal are without prejudice to each other. 4. That the appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or forgo any ground(s) of appeal either before or at the time of hearing of the appeal." ITA No.7862/Del/2017 "1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the Penalty of Rs. 45,46,111/- which was imposed by the AO on account of conceal interest income of Rs. 1,47,12,333/- on account of undisclosed interest income in HSBC Geneva. 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the Pen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... factual matrix of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) should not have followed his order in Assessment Year 2006-07. The Ld. CIT-DR also referred to the order of the ITAT in assessee's own case for Assessment Year 2014-15 wherein an identical addition on account of interest had been deleted. The Ld. CIT-DR submitted that there was perversity in the findings of the ITAT and, therefore, the same should not be followed. 4.0 The Ld. CIT-DR also submitted that the penalty imposed was consequential and the sustenance of the penalty would depend on the outcome of the quantum appeal filed by the Department. 5.0 Per contra, the Ld. AR placed reliance on the order of the ITAT in assessee's own case in Assessment Year 2014-15 and submitted that in view of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uantum appeal. He also submitted a copy of the order of the coordinate bench dated 23 August 2019 in case of the assessee for assessment year 2008 - 09. He also submitted a chart for the various years wherein the addition of notional interest on account of balance in the alleged foreign bank account of the assessee starting from assessment year 2006 - 07 to assessment year 2014 - 15 are added by the learned assessing officer and deleted by the learned CIT - A. We have carefully considered the order of the coordinate bench in ITA number 5395 and 5396/del/2017 for assessment year 2006 - 07 and 2007 - 08 dated 15th of February 2018 wherein the addition on account of investment in the bank account itself was deleted. As the quantum addition its....