9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (1) TMI 165X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ain why the income was not shown and why inaccurate particulars of income furnished in the original return Blameworthiness attached to the assessee with reference to the original return cannot be avoided by filing revised return after concealment was detected by the revenue authorities. - Where the concealment of income made in the original return or where the surrender of income made was not voluntarily but was as a result of detection by the assessing officer, filing of revised return is of no consequence - There is a burden cast upon the assessee to prove that the deposits indeed is not the income of the assessee and this burden is not discharged in this case - Accordingly, if the assessee satisfactorily explain the nature and source of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssment years were reopened for the assessment years 2004-05 and 2005-06. For the assessment years 2004-05 the assessee filed revised return on 11.12.2007 declaring income at Rs. 23,70,950 and once again on 27.12.07 filed revised return declaring income at Rs. 35,13,770. Which covers peak cash deposit of Rs. 18 lakhs and difference in valuation in the construction of building at Megha Hills,GuttalaVillage, Begumpet. 5. For the assessment year 2005-06, the assessee filed original return on 27.9.2005 admitting income of Rs. 7,91,562 and agricultural income of Rs. 1.95 lakhs. After survey, Notice u/s 148 was issued on 14.8.2007 The assessee filed revised return on 11.12.2007 admitting income of Rs. 30,20,120 including additional income offered ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hs 7. Further, the assessing officer levied penalty in all these assessment years for concealing the income with regard to amount lying in the bank accounts of the assessee as follows: 2004-05 Rs. 5,94,000 2005-06 Rs. 3,02,940 2006-07 Rs. 7,91,010 8. The assessee carried the appeal to the CIT(A) who have confirmed the order of the assessing officer. Against this the assessee is in appeal before us. 9. The learned authorised representative for the assessee submitted that the assessee is a real estate agent and facilitating the real estate transactions and the assessee receives the cash in the normal course of its business and in the course of its business, the assessee advances and deposits to the bank. The same was treated as incom ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ingly hold that the grounds of appeal preferred by the Revenue, being devoid of merit, are liable to be rejected. Accordingly they are rejected. 11. On the other hand, the learned departmental representative submitted that the explanation given by the assessee is very vague. The assessee concealed the bank accounts only because of survey action, the bank accounts came to light and the assessee offered additional income only because he was caught by the department. Had there been no survey, the assessee would have very much concealed the accounts. Further, the explanation of the assessee is that an amount deposited in the banks is of various customers. The assessee not produced any customers or any documents suggesting the money deposited i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n (P.) Ltd. (327 ITR 510 (Delhi) 28. CIT v. Harparshad & Co. Ltd. (328 ITR 53) (Delhi) 29. Union of Income v. Dharmendra Textiles Processors (306 UTR 277) (SC) 30. Indus Engineering Co. v. ACIT (Ind.) (323 ITR 302) (Bom.) 31. P. Rajaswamy v. CIT (323 ITR 527) (Ker.) 32. CIT v. M.K. Ali (323 ITR 529) (Ker.) 33. Kamal Basja v. DCIT ( 316 ITR 58) (Mds.) 13. We have heard both the parties and perused the material placed on record. The question of concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income for the purpose of section 271(1)(c) of the Act is to be determined with reference to the original return. Even if the income is surrendered in the revised return, the assessee still has to explain why the income was not sho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Act the assessee filed the returns for the two years i.e. assessment year 2004-05 and 2005-06. In our opinion, the revised return filed by the assessee is of no consequence for not levying the penalty and that surrender was made on detection of the bank accounts by the department and it is not voluntary disclosure. Only because the assessee filed a revised return stating that the assessee offered additional income appearing in the bank accounts to buy peace of mind and to close litigation would not be conclusive as it was a demand made by the assessee on its own favour. Even if the assessee has not offered additional income appearing in the bank accounts as income, it is no difference and the department is at liberty to treat the amount in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
