2013 (2) TMI 291 - HC - Income Tax

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - ITAT deleted the levy by granting benefit of immunity arising out of Explanation-5 to Section 271(1)(c) - Held that - The manner in which the income was derived has also been disclosed and the assessee has thereafter paid the tax and the applicable interest, thus all the requirements of the clause were met by the assessee and, therefore, the Tribunal took the correct view of the matter in allowing the immunity and upholding the view of the CIT appeals and setting aside the order of penalty passed by AO - in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
- Interpretation of Explanation-5 to Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act.
- Whether the Assessee is entitled to immunity from penalty under the said provision.
- Compliance with the requirements of the clause under Explanation-5.
- Consideration of relevant case laws in determining the applicability of penalty.

Analysis:
1. The appeal challenged a judgment upholding the decision that the Assessees are entitled to immunity under Explanation-5 to Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. The Revenue contended that the Assessee's immunity from penalty was unjustified as they would not have disclosed the income without the search.

2. The Assessee's representative argued that penalty can only be imposed if the Assessee does not meet the exception clause in Explanation-5. The key contention revolved around whether the Assessee fulfilled the conditions specified in the clause, including making a statement during the search and paying the tax on the undisclosed income.

3. The Assessee's representative emphasized that the Assessee had made a statement during the search, disclosed the manner in which the income was derived, and paid the tax along with interest. Referring to case laws, it was argued that meeting these requirements entitled the Assessee to immunity from penalty under Explanation-5.

4. The representative further cited judgments from Madras and Rajasthan High Courts supporting the view that disclosure of undisclosed income during a search, payment of tax, and interest immunize the Assessee from penalty. The Tribunal's decision was supported by the compliance of the Assessee with the conditions specified in Explanation-5.

5. The Court considered the arguments presented and concluded that the Assessee had fulfilled all requirements under Explanation-5, thereby justifying the Tribunal's decision to grant immunity from penalty. The Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the Tribunal's decision and setting aside the penalty imposed by the assessing officer.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the interpretation of the relevant legal provisions, the fulfillment of conditions for immunity, and the consideration of precedents in arriving at the decision to dismiss the appeal.