9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Appeals against penalty orders u/s 271(1)(c) for A.Y. 2004-05 and A.Y. 2005-06.
For A.Y. 2004-05: The Assessee challenged the penalty order of &8377; 19,78,100/- u/s 271(1)(c) for unexplained investments in land. The Assessing Officer added &8377; 60 lacs to the Assessee's income as unaccounted investment, which was later deleted by the Tribunal. The Tribunal found discrepancies in the evidence presented by the Assessing Officer and reversed the order of CIT(A). As the quantum addition was deleted, the Tribunal ruled that the penalty cannot be levied, directing its deletion. For A.Y. 2005-06: The Assessee contested the penalty order of &8377; 5,07,300/- u/s 271(1)(c) for undisclosed income related to a benami bank account. The Assessing Officer calculated the peak credit differently from the Assessee and levied the penalty based on an estimation. The Tribunal noted that the addition was not based on tangible material and the Assessee's explanation was not false. Therefore, the penalty was deleted as it cannot be levied merely on estimation of income. In both cases, the Tribunal allowed the appeals of the Assessee, emphasizing that penalties cannot be upheld when the underlying additions to income have been deleted or are based on estimations without concrete evidence.
|
