2018 (9) TMI 875 - AT - Income Tax

Penalty levied u/s 271AAA - assessee surrendered during the assessment proceedings - Held that - It is pertinent to note that the Assessing Officer himself has recorded the statement of Shri Mohinder Kumar Gupta in the assessment order, wherein the Director of the Company has elaborated the transaction which was also confirmed by Mr. Kailash Chandra Agarwal. The assessee Company through its reply has also explained the manner in which the income was derived. Thus, the assessee in our opinion has explained substantially the income which was surrendered during the assessment proceedings. Therefore, Section 271AAA of the Income Tax Act will not be applicable in the present case. - Decided against revenue.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Penalty under section 271AAA - Deletion of penalty by CIT(A)
2. Requirement of explaining undisclosed income under section 271AAA

Analysis:

Issue 1: Penalty under section 271AAA - Deletion of penalty by CIT(A)
The appeal was filed by the Revenue against the order passed by CIT(A)-III, Gurgaon for Assessment Year 2009-10. The Assessing Officer initiated penalty proceedings under section 271AAA after a search and seizure operation at the business premises of the assessee. The group surrendered a total sum, out of which a portion was attributed to the assessee. The Assessing Officer levied a penalty of ?70,00,000, which was challenged by the assessee before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) allowed the appeal of the assessee, leading to the Revenue's appeal before the ITAT.

Issue 2: Requirement of explaining undisclosed income under section 271AAA
The key contention was whether the assessee had explained the manner in which the undisclosed income was derived, as required under section 271AAA. The Revenue argued that the assessee failed to substantiate the manner of income, thus justifying the penalty. On the other hand, the assessee contended that during the assessment proceedings, the manner of deriving undisclosed income was sufficiently explained. The ITAT observed that the Assessing Officer had recorded the statement of a director of the company, where the transaction details were elaborated. The ITAT noted that the assessee had explained substantially the income surrendered during the assessment proceedings. Referring to previous tribunal decisions, the ITAT concluded that the assessee had met the conditions of section 271AAA, and hence, the penalty was not applicable in the present case.

In conclusion, the ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the penalty under section 271AAA. The appeal of the Revenue was dismissed, and the Cross Objection filed by the assessee was also dismissed as the appeal of the Revenue was rejected.