2023 (3) TMI 1463 - HC - Income Tax

Delay of 3270 days in re-filing the appeal - reasons given in the application is that there were certain objections and to remove those objections, sometime was taken to arrange relevant documents. The applicant had to consult various lawyers at Muktsar and after March 2020 on account of lock down, he was not able to consult the lawyers and in this backdrop, delay occured - Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) imposed as income surrender in the revised return of the income, after detection of concealment by the Department as a result of search of incriminating documents in the course of search and seizure operations HELD THAT - The Tribunal, while dismissing the appeal of the appellant, had taken into consideration the judgments in the case of G.C. Aggarwal Vs. CIT 1990 (9) TMI 2 - SUPREME COURT and Allahabad High Court in Mool Chand Mahesh Chand vs. CIT 1978 (3) TMI 65 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT on the proposition that disclosure was made by the assessee in the revised return in response to 148(A) of the Act after search operation and in the revised returns, the assessee disclosed much larger incomes without justification than those disclosed in the original returns. The revised returns had been filed with a view to avoid litigation and imposition of penalty was upheld. Hence, order passed by the Tribunal does not require any interference as no substantial question of law arises in this appeal. The appeal is being dismissed on the ground of delay of 3270 days in refiling the appeal as well as on merits.

Summary

Issues Involved:
The issues involved in the judgment are condonation of delay in filing the appeal and the merits of the case related to penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act for concealed income.

Condonation of Delay:
The judgment addresses two applications - one for condonation of a 60-day delay in filing the appeal and another for condonation of a significant delay of 3270 days in re-filing the appeal. The court notes that no valid explanation is provided for the extensive delay of 3270 days. The reasons cited include objections that needed to be addressed, difficulties in arranging relevant documents, consultations with lawyers, and the impact of the lockdown post-March 2020. However, the court finds these reasons insufficient to justify such a prolonged delay.

Merits of the Case - Concealment of Income:
The court examines the impugned order dated 14.09.2012, which upheld the penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. It is revealed that the assessee had concealed income for the relevant assessment years and failed to disclose the surrender made in the original income returns. The surrender was made in response to a notice under Section 153A of the Act, following the detection of concealment during a search operation. The court observes that the surrender was not made in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Act. The Tribunal, in its decision, considered previous judgments and upheld the penalty, stating that the revised returns disclosed larger incomes without justification, filed to avoid litigation.

Conclusion:
The court concludes that the order passed by the Tribunal does not warrant interference, as no substantial question of law arises in the appeal. The appeal is dismissed due to the significant delay of 3270 days in re-filing the appeal and on the merits of the case related to concealed income. The pending application is also dismissed.