9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
- Challenge against penalty imposed under section 158BFA(2) for the block period 1-4-1987 to 9-10-1997. Detailed Analysis: 1. Facts and Background: - Search conducted on 9-10-1997 at residential and business premises. - Block assessment made on total undisclosed income of Rs. 78,530. - Penalty of Rs. 48,000 imposed under section 158BFA(2). 2. Appellant's Arguments: - Requested deletion of penalty citing various case laws. - Contended that satisfaction not recorded during initiation of penalty proceedings. - Claimed prevented from timely compliance due to delayed access to seized material. - Asserted that belated return is valid as undisclosed income was accepted. - Argued that penalty imposition unjustified without evidence of misconduct. 3. Revenue's Position: - Supported penalty imposition based on belated return filing. - Argued against invoking the first proviso to section 158BFA(2). 4. Judgment and Legal Provisions: - Discussed provisions of section 158BFA regarding interest and penalty. - Analyzed conditions for penalty imposition under section 158BFA(2). - Emphasized the importance of affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard. - Noted discretion of authorities to levy or not levy penalty based on circumstances. 5. Decision and Rationale: - Found no difference between assessed and returned undisclosed income. - Questioned the applicability of penalty when no variance exists. - Referred to the Second Proviso to section 158BFA(2) and its exceptions. - Highlighted the need for judicious exercise of penalty imposition. - Cited a relevant Pune Bench decision supporting the appeal's acceptance. - Directed deletion of the penalty imposed under section 158BFA(2). 6. Conclusion: - The appeal of the assessee was accepted, and the penalty was ordered to be deleted, based on the analysis of legal provisions and the specific circumstances of the case.
|
