Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2025 (2) TMI 583 - SC - Income TaxPenalty u/s 271AAA - Appellant did not make payment of tax - As argued Revenue Authorities without satisfying themselves as to the satisfaction of undisclosed income as stipulated in Section 271AAA(1) levied the penalty HELD THAT - Section 271AAA(1) stipulates that the Assessing Officer may notwithstanding anything contained in any other provisions of the Act 1961 direct the Assessee in a case where search has been carried out to pay by way of a penalty in addition to the tax a sum computed at the rate of 10% (Ten per cent) of the undisclosed income of the specified previous year. However the imposition of penalty is not mandatory. Consequently penalty under this Section may be levied if there is undisclosed income in the specified previous year. This Court is of the view that though under Section 271AAA(1) of the Act 1961 the Assessing Officer has the discretion to levy penalty yet this discretionary power is not unfettered unbridled and uncanalised. Discretion means sound discretion guided by law. It must be governed by rule not by humour it must not be arbitrary vague and fanciful. See Som Raj and Others vs. State of Haryana and Others 1990 (2) TMI 306 - SUPREME COURT . Section 271AAA(2) stipulates that Section 271AAA(1) shall not be applicable if the assessee (i) in a statement under sub-section (4) of Section 132 in the course of the search admits the undisclosed income and specifies the manner in which such income has been derived; (ii) substantiates the manner in which the undisclosed income was derived; and (iii) pays the tax together with interest if any in respect of the undisclosed income. (See Chaturvedi Pithisaria s Income Tax Law Seventh Edition). Consequently if the aforesaid conditions (i) and (ii) are satisfied and the tax together with interest on the undisclosed income is paid upto the date of payment even with delay in the absence of specific period of compliance then penalty at the rate of 10% (Ten per cent) under Section 271AAA is normally not leviable. The expression Undisclosed Income has been defined in Explanation (a) appended to Section 271AAA.The onus is on the Assessing Officer to satisfy the condition precedent stipulated in the said Explanation before the charge for levy of penalty is fastened on the assessee. Consequently it is obligatory on the part of the Assessing Officer to demonstrate and prove that undisclosed income of the specified previous year was found during the course of search or as a result of the search. Expression specified previous year has been defined in Explanation (b) appended to Section 271AAA of the Act 1961. Since in the present case the search was conducted on 25th November 2010 and as the year for filing returns under Section 139(1) of the Act 1961 which ended prior to that date had expired on 31st July 2010 Explanation b(i) is not applicable so as to make AY 2010-11 the specified previous year. Consequently by virtue of Explanation b(ii) AY 2011-12 (the year in which the search was conducted) is the specified previous year in the present case for the purpose of Section 271AAA(1) of the Act 1961. Penalty levied - In the present case the Appellant admitted Rs.2, 27, 65, 580/- as income for AY 2011-12 during the search before DDIT (Inv.) as well as substantiated the manner in which the said undisclosed income was derived and paid tax together with interest thereon albeit belatedly. Consequently all the conditions precedent mentioned in Section 271AAA(2) stand satisfied and therefore penalty under Section 271AAA(1) is not attracted on the said amount. Penalty @ 10% levied - It is an admitted position that the Appellant had not offered in the declaration before the DDIT(Inv.) any income on land transactions belonging to Mr. Sharab Reddy and Mr. NHR Prasad Reddy. The argument that the said transactions had not been found in the search at the Appellant s premises but had been found due to copies of sale deeds collected from the society cuts no ice with this Court as the sale deeds had been collected as a result of the search and in continuation of the search. This Court is of the view that as the causation for collecting the sale deeds from the Society was the search at the Appellant s premises it cannot be said that the said documents were not found in the course of the search. Further this Court is of the opinion that the expression found in the course of search is of a wide amplitude. It does not mean documents found in the assessee s premises alone during the search. At times search of an assessee leads to a search of another individual and/or further investigation/interrogation of third parties. All these steps and recoveries therein would fall within the expression found in the course of search . Since income of Rs.2, 49, 90, 000/- constitutes undisclosed income found during the search penalty under Section 271AAA(1) of the Act 1961 is leviable on the said amount. Also as the said amount was not admitted in the declaration before the DDIT(Inv.) during the course of search but was disclosed by the Appellant only during the assessment proceedings and that too after the Assessing Officer had asked for copies of the sale deeds from the Society this Court is of the view that the exception carved out in Section 271AAA(2) is not attracted to the said portion of the income.
1. ISSUES PRESENTED and CONSIDERED
The core legal issues considered in this judgment include:
2. ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSIS Compliance with Section 271AAA(2)
Discretion in Imposing Penalty under Section 271AAA(1)
Interpretation of "Undisclosed Income" and "Specified Previous Year"
Penalty Imposition on Undisclosed Income
3. SIGNIFICANT HOLDINGS
|