TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2008 (11) TMI 47
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2005 and pertains to the block period 01.04.1999 to 06.07.2000. As the questions set out above would indicate, the appeal arises out of penalty proceedings under Section 158 BFA (2) of the said Act. The facts are that a search under Section 132 of the said Act was conducted on 06.07.2000 on the JMD Group of Companies. Certain material (Annexure A-6/R-2 of the seized papers) which related to the assessee was found in the course of the search. The said material indicated cash receipt from the assessee against goods sold to the assessee by the JMD Group on earlier dates. Although in the present case the search was conducted in respect of the JMD Group of Companies and not in respect of the assessee, and, consequently, the provisions of Section 158 BD would be applicable, however, in terms of Section 158 BD itself the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction over the assessee, was required to proceed under Section 158 BC and the provisions of Chapter XIV-B were to apply accordingly. Action under Section 158 BC read with Section 158 BD of the said Act was initiated in respect of the assessee on account of the aforesaid material. Initially, the assessee had challenged the validity of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ker involved in such dealings' Ans. No, we used to directly purchased from them. Q14. I am showing you entry at page 20 Annexure A-2/R-1, there is one entry on the right side in the name of Har Karan Das Ved Pal. Can you explain the same. Ans. This entry shows payments made to M/s Harkaran Das Ved Pal against the supply made by them. Q15. Can you categorically state that the goods subject of sale belong to Harkaran Das Ved Pal operating from 470, Lawrence Road, Delhi. Ans. No, as already stated above, these entries are entered in the names which are stated by brokers. Q16. Can you identify the person to whom cash was paid' Ans. Entire purchase and sale is carried out through brokers. I cannot, therefore, identify the person to whom cash was paid. Q17. Can you confirm that cash was paid to Mr Ved Pal Gupta or any of the partner/ staff member' Ans. No. Q18. When the broker gives you a name of the party, did you same before entering the same in the loose papers' Ans. No, because this is faith business and we write whatever name is stated by brokers. Q19. Can you categorically state that the transactions recorded in loose papers in the name of Harkaran Das Ved Pal relates t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....-99 270175 270175 Nil 1999-00 294120 294120 Nil 2000-01 1187020 347020 840000 2000-02 137310 122310 15000 (upto 6.7.2000) 36290 - 855000 Assessed on undisclosed income of Rs 855000. Charge interest under Section 158 BFA (1) of the I. T. Act. Initiate penalty proceedings under Section 158 BFA (2). Issue notice of demand and challan.' Thus, the total undisclosed income was held to be Rs'8,55,000/- for the block period. The assessee did not challenge the same any further. 5. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer issued a show cause notice before the levy of penalty under Section 158 BFA (2) of the said Act. The Assessing Officer noted that the assessee had shown the total undisclosed income for the block period to be nil but, that in the block assessment, the assessee had been assessed at undisclosed income of Rs'8,55,000/-. Adverting to the second proviso to Section 158 BFA (2), the Assessing Officer observed that the said proviso specifically stated that penalty 'shall' be paid on the difference between the 'undisclosed income determined' and the undisclosed income shown in the return. He was of the view that since the undisclosed inc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... implied that the assessee was not required to make any investment while making the purchases. The Tribunal also noted that even otherwise there was no evidence found as a result of search, which suggested that the transactions for whole of the year required investment in the first instance. While the Assessing Officer had estimated undisclosed investment at 1/5th of the total turnover of the first year, the Tribunal returned a finding of fact that no amount was found to have been invested in the first instance for transactions for whole of the year and that, therefore, the estimate of undisclosed investment was based merely on the surrender made by the assessee. 8. The Tribunal also held that the adoption by the Assessing Officer of the 1% net profit of undisclosed transactions was also without any basis. It noted that the chart reproduced by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order suggested that the net profit rate of earlier years ranged between 0.45 to 0.62%. From this, the Tribunal held that even the estimate of 1% net profit was mere guesswork. On the basis of these findings, the Tribunal concluded that, just because the assessee had surrendered the amount of Rs 8 lacs....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., we may point out that the decision in Durga Timber Works (supra) was in the context of Section 271 (1)(c) of the said Act which, even as per the submissions of the learned counsel for the revenue, are distinct and different from the provisions of Section 158 BFA (2). Moreover, this is not a case where the department is being asked to establish the extent of undisclosed income even after the assessee had made a surrender of the sum of Rs 8 lacs. The question in the present case is different and that is as to whether a penalty can be imposed on the assessee under Section 158 BFA (2). The observation made in Durga Timber Works (supra) was in entirely different circumstances and would, in any event, not be of any advantage to the revenue in the present case. 11. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that Chapter XIV-B is a self-contained code and is a mode of assessment of undisclosed income, which has been detected as a result of search. He also submitted that it is settled law that the findings in the assessment proceedings are not conclusive for the purposes of deciding the question of penalty. As regards the first proposition that the procedure under ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....must reasonably point to the conclusion that the disputed amount represented income and that the assessee had consciously concealed the particulars of his income or had deliberately furnished inaccurate particulars.' CIT v. Khoday Eswarsa and Sons:83 ITR 369, 376 (SC) -'From the above it is clear that penalty proceedings being penal in character, the department must establish that the receipt of the amount in dispute constitutes income of the assessee. Apart from the falsity of the explanation given by the assessee, the department must have before it before levying penalty cogent material or evidence from which it could be inferred that the assessee has consciously concealed the particulars of his income or had deliberately furnished inaccurate particulars in respect of the same and that the disputed amount is a revenue receipt. No doubt the original assessment proceedings, for computing the tax may be a good item of evidence in the penalty proceedings but the penalty cannot be levied solely on the basis of the reasons given in the original order of assessment.' CIT v. J.K. Synthetics Ltd.: 219 ITR 267 (Del) - 'However, the proceedings for imposition of penalty and assessme....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er:- 'The High Court accused the Tribunal of not considering the time when the assessee admitted the additions. We find that it was duly considered by the Tribunal. We find that the assessee, admitted that these were the incomes of the assessee but that was not an admission that there was deliberate concealment. From agreeing to additions, it does not follow that the amount agreed to be added was concealed income. There may be a hundred and one reasons for such admission, i.e., when the assessee realises the true position, it does not dispute certain disallowances but that does not absolve the Revenue from proving the mens rea of a quasi-criminal offence.' At this stage itself, we may note that the learned counsel for the revenue / appellant contended that the decision in Sir Shadilal Sugar and General Mills Ltd (supra) is no longer good law as observed by a larger Bench of the Supreme Court in the subsequent decision in the case of K.P. Madhusudhanan v. Commissioner of Income-tax: 251 ITR 99 (SC). The exact manner in which the later decision has referred to the earlier decision in the case of Sir Shadilal Sugar and General Mills Ltd (supra) is as follows:- 'Learned counse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of the said Act was discretionary and not automatic as was evident from the use of the word 'may' in the said provision. The learned counsel submitted that the Tribunal was right in deleting the penalty under Section 158 BFA (2) of the said Act on the basis of the findings returned by it and consequently, both the questions ought to be decided in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. 17. Before we proceed to answer the questions in the light of the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties, it would be necessary to notice the statutory provisions. Section 158 BFA (2) reads as under:- '158BFA. Levy of interest and penalty in certain cases.' (1) xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx (2) The Assessing Officer or the Commissioner (Appeals), in the course of any proceedings under this Chapter, may direct that a person shall pay by way of penalty a sum which shall not be less than the amount of tax leviable but which shall not exceed three times the amount of tax so leviable in respect of the undisclosed income determined by the Assessing Officer under clause (c) of section 158BC: Provided that no order imposing penalty shall be made in respect of a person if (i) such person has f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng Officer. 18. The first proviso clearly stipulates the circumstances under which an order imposing penalty cannot be made. Where a person has furnished a return under Clause (a) of Section 158 BC and the tax payable on the basis of such return has been paid or, if the assets seized consist of money, the assessee offers the money so seized to be adjusted against the tax payable and the evidence of tax paid is furnished along with the return and an appeal is not filed against the assessment of that part of income which is shown in the return, no order imposing a penalty can be made under Section 158 BFA (2). The intention of the legislature is clear. Where, after a person receives a notice under Section 158 BC and he furnishes a return indicating undisclosed income and tax is paid or the money seized is offered to be adjusted against the tax payable and if the assessee does not appeal against the assessment completed on that basis, then no penalty can be imposed on such an assessee. The intention of the legislature is that where a person, who has been granted an opportunity of making a clean breast of things, comes forth and declares his undisclosed income and also pays the tax th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....k assessment. Clause (b) thereof stipulates as under:- (b) the Assessing Officer shall proceed to determine the undisclosed income of the block period in the manner laid down in section 158BB and the provisions of section 142, sub-sections (2) and (3) of section 143 31,'section 144 and section 145 shall, so far as may be, apply;' This is followed by clause (c) which reads as under:-'(c) the Assessing Officer, on determination of the undisclosed income of the block period in accordance with this Chapter, shall pass an order of assessment and determine the tax payable by him on the basis of such assessment;' Thus, determination of the undisclosed income has to be done in the manner laid down in Section 158 BB and the provisions of Section 142, sub-section (2) and (3) of Section 143, Section 144 and Section 145 shall, so far as may be, apply. Section 158 BB deals with computation of undisclosed income of the block period. Section 158 BB (1), so much as is relevant for our purposes, reads as under:-'158BB. (1) The undisclosed income of the block period shall be the aggregate of the total income of the previous years falling within the block period computed, in accordance....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng Officer under clause (c) of Section 158 BC of the said Act. If this is not satisfied, then there would be no question of imposing any penalty. 22. In the present case, we find that the computation of undisclosed income by the Assessing Officer cannot be construed as 'undisclosed income determined by the Assessing Officer under clause (c) of Section 158 BC'. The Tribunal has already returned a finding that there is no evidence found as a result of search, which suggests that the transactions for the whole year of 1999-2000 required any investment in the first instance. The Tribunal has also found as a fact that no amount was found to have been invested by the assessee in the first instance for the transactions of the whole year. The Tribunal also found that even the estimate of 1% net profit was mere guesswork. On the basis of these facts it is apparent that the undisclosed income has been computed merely on the basis of the surrender made by the assessee in the course of the block assessment proceedings. De hors the surrender, there is no evidence which could have been said to have been found as a result of the search and, therefore, the 'computation' of undisclosed income by t....