TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (11) TMI 362
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....R PER SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (J.M): 1. This appeal has been preferred against the impugned order dated 09.10.2023 passed in Appeal no. CIT(A), Mumbai-25/10154/2015-16 by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals)/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) [hereinafter referred to as the "CIT(A)"] u/s. 250 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as "Act"] for the Assessment year [A.Y.] 2009....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ec.50C of the Act and added the difference between the stamp duty value and sale consideration as deemed income of the assessee. The penalty was also levied on this addition and it was confirmed by the Ld.CIT(A). 4. We notice that this addition has been made by the AO u/s 50C of the Act, wherein the difference between the stamp duty value and the actual consideration is deemed as the income of th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ition has been made on account of deeming fiction only Hence, following the decision of the Hon'ble Kolkata High Court (referred supra), we hold that the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act is not leviable on this addition. Accordingly, we set aside the order passed by the Ld.CIT(A) on this issue and direct the AO to delete the penalty levied on this addition. 5. The next addition on which penal....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....into the bank account over and above the cash balance available in the books of account. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has held in the case of MAK Data P Ltd (352 ITR 1) (SC) that voluntary disclosure does not release the assessee from mischief of penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. However, in this case, the surrender was after being found out that there was negative cash balance. Hence....