TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (7) TMI 2174
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in short the AO") dated 22.12.2006 under section 143(3) of Income Tax Act,1961 (in short 'the Act'). 2. Ground No.1 the learned C.I.T.(A) has erred in confirming the penalty of Rs. 7,72,888/- u/s.271(1)(c) of Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed his return of income declaring total income of Rs. 1,01,290/- on 28.10.2004 and the income consists of salary and income from other sources. In the case of Shri Jayantibhai Lakhani Prop. of M/s.Indo Fashion Fab, survey proceedings u/s.133A of the Income Tax Act was carried out on 21.03.2005. It is noted that during the course of survey proceedings it was admitted by Shri Jayantibhai Lakhani that he and his group members had accepted unsecured loans by giving....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Act initiated for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income and thereby concealment of income on entire amount of Rs. 26,96,004/-. Despite, AO given number of opportunities there was large scale of non-compliance from the side of the assessee and assessee failed to prove the genuineness of the loan which gives AO no other option than to treat this as bogus loan and add the same as nongenuine cash credit u/s.68 of the I.T.Act. In the quantum appeal, the CIT(A) has given a relief of Rs. 6,65,602/- against the addition made in the assessment order. Finally, in absence of any explanation before the AO, penalty of Rs. 7,72,888/- was imposed. 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before the ld.CIT(A), whereas in quantum appeal ld.CI....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dings in the Lakhani Group, Shri Jayantibhai Lakhani had disclosed huge amount on behalf of several persons out of fear and mental pressure. He had disclosed Rs. 26,69,004/- on account of alleged unexplained cash credit in his name and further submitted that he retracted the same. He surrendered the deposits of Rs. 11,17,975/- as additional income towards cash credit in the revised return of income and filed the same in the revised return of income showing taxable income of Rs. 12,19,266/- which includes the surrendered amount of Rs. 11,17,975/- towards cash credit. 7. The learned Senior Departmental Representative relied upon the orders of the lower authorities and submitted that the assessee has not complied with the orders of the AO and....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....parties before the AO and also failed to furnish their whereabouts before the AO. Considering the non-cooperative attitude of the assessee the AO treated Rs. 15,51,029/- which were not disclosed in the return of income as agreed earlier to surrender as undisclosed income u/s 68 of the IT Act. Similarly, the assessee did not provide full details along with confirmation from the depositors. Therefore, sum of Rs. 3,52,112/- was also treated as non-genuine cash credits. The learned CIT(A) considering the request of the assessee to produce the parties to substantiate his claim of genuine cash credits remanded the matter to the file of the AO. At the appellate stage, some of the parties were produced and their statements were recorded by the AO a....