9911796707
|
Home
Issues: Appeal against orders of CIT(A) on quantum and penalty under s. 271(1)(c) for the asst. yr. 1992-93.
Analysis: 1. The AO found that the assessee made a deposit of Rs. 2,55,000 with a company during the year, claiming it was received from the NRE account during the Immunity Scheme, 1991. The AO held the amount as concealed income, initiating penalty proceedings under s. 271(1)(c). The CIT(A) upheld the AO's decision, stating the Immunity Scheme did not apply to the assessee, and the claim of gift lacked proof of donor identity. The Tribunal noted that the AO did not provide a reasonable opportunity for the assessee to rebut the evidence collected, directing a re-decision by the AO after affording the assessee a full opportunity to substantiate claims. 2. The assessee argued that the amount was received from the NRE account under the Immunity Scheme, 1991, duly certified by the bank. The Tribunal emphasized the necessity of determining whether the amount was a loan or gift, and the identity and tax status of the resident depositor. It deemed the AO's investigation insufficient and ordered a fresh decision after allowing the assessee to present necessary details and rebut the findings. The penalty was set aside pending the reassessment of the assessability issue, ensuring a fair process. 3. The Tribunal found that the AO's investigation lacked completeness and fairness, emphasizing the importance of providing the assessee with a full opportunity to counter collected evidence. It directed the AO to reevaluate the assessability issue and penalty assessment after affording the assessee a chance to substantiate claims and present necessary details. The orders of the CIT(A) were set aside for fresh decisions, ensuring a fair and comprehensive reassessment process.
|
