9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (9) TMI 729X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4 (10) TMI 54 - MADHYA PRADESH High Court] - each deposit was less than ₹ 20,000/- which is meager amount.- The assessee might have contested it on merit, but to purchase peace, he has surrendered the amount, which was accepted by the Department - when it is so, then the penalty is not attributed – thus, the order levying the penalty is to be set aside – Decided in favour of assessee. - Inc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the appellant of an amount of ₹ 1,47,000/- deposited by various parties shown in the Balance-sheet attached to the return of income has not been filed voluntarily and in good faith? (b) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct that when the appellant was concerned by the Assessing Officer from all sides, then only appellant made the surrender ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessee has revised the return and has surrendered a sum of ₹ 1,47,000/- pertaining to the cash credit. The A.O. has made the addition at ₹ 1,47,000/- and at the same time initiated the penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act and levied the penalty of ₹ 60,000/-. The same was confirmed by the appellate authorities. Not being satisfied, the assessee has filed th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he impugned order passed by the Tribunal. He submits that the surrender was not voluntarily, so the penalty is justifiable. To support his argument, he relied on the ratio laid down in the following cases :- (a) K.P. Madhusudhanan Vs. CIT 2001 (251) ITR 99 (SC); and (b) Karanvir Singh Gossal Vs. CIT [2012] 349 ITR 692 (SC). We heard both the parties at length and on perusal of the materia ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... luntarily just to avoid any litigation. When it is so, then the penalty is not attributed as per the ratio laid down in the case of CIT Vs. Kiran Co. 217 ITR 336 (Bombay). In the peculiar circumstances of the case, lenient view is to be taken as per CBDT Circular No. 451 dated 17.2.1986 as well as the ratio laid down in the case of Shri Shyam Oil Co. Vs. CIT 286 ITR 251 (MP). In view of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
