9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 268X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ain satisfactorily about the cash deposits neither in the quantum proceedings nor in the penalty proceedings. It was incumbent upon the assessee to furnish the true and correct particulars of income. In the case in hand, it is transpired from the records that the assessee has failed to disclose the Bank Account on various dates cash deposits were made. Under these facts, we do not see any reason to interfere with the findings of the authorities below. However, ld.counsel for the assessee submitted that in the quantum proceedings, the Tribunal has reduced the addition from ₹ 37,75,000/- to ₹ 14,19,919.88 in assessee’s own case for AY 2008-09. We, therefore, direct the AO to delete the penalty on the addition in sum of ₹ 23 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... with Prime Co-op.Bank Ltd., where he had made cash deposits to the tune of ₹ 37,75,000/- on various dates during the Financial Year 2007-08. The transactions were made not reflected in the return of income furnished for the year under consideration. The explanation has given by the assessee was not found acceptable by the AO and the AO made addition by invoking the provisions of section 69A of the Act amounting to ₹ 37,75,000/-. The AO also initiated penalty proceedings u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act. In quantum proceedings, the matter travelled upto the stage of Tribunal (ITAT B Bench, Ahmedabad) was pleased to confirm the addition. Subsequently, the AO passed a penalty order dated 18/03/2013 thereby the AO levied a penalty of S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sed the transactions in the income tax return. He had also not disclosed Bank Account Number (10011001005255) to the Revenue Authorities. He further submitted that as per the provisions of section 271(1)(c) of the Act, the penalty is leviable if the assessee has concealed the particulars of his income or furnished inaccurate particulars of such income. He submitted that in the given case, the assessee has not disclosed the source of the deposits in the Bank and Bank Account Number to the Revenue Authorities. Under these facts, the authorities below were justified in levying the penalty and confirming the same. He submitted that the decisions as relied upon by the ld.counsel for the assessee are not applicable on the facts of the present cas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is not considered and disclosed in the return of income. The assessee has enclosed Xerox copies of brokers contract note, statement of account, P L account before the AO as per submission at P.B. Page 2. The copy of P L account filed before AO is at page 3,4,5. The Xerox copy of the contract note and statement of the assessee with the brokers were also filed before AO as per P.B. Page 6 to 194. The AO's order u/s. 143(3) is at page 236 to 241. as per P.B. Page 240, AO has stated that, assessee has furnished unsigned ledger copies of brokers. In this connection we said that, assessee has furnished, PAN. Address of all the brokers and the statements are computer generated and, therefore, no signature required. The AO has not issued any s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... regarding undisclosed bank account considered sales proceeds and only net profit rate of 3.5% is applied as per para 13 of the judgments which is enclosed herewith at page 259 to 263. Therefore, there are two view of Ahmedabad Bench on same facts. 5. It is respectfully submitted that, assessee has given various statements, contract note and PAN and' address of all the share brokers before the AO, AO/CIT(A)/ITAT in the proceedings u/s. 143(3) and, therefore, discharged the onus regarding actual loss incurred in the said bank account and, therefore, in view of the Bona Fide of the assessee, the said bank account has not been disclosed. All these evidences are again as per page 6 to 194. Therefore, there is no such question of levy ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed 21.06.2013, P.B. Page 259 to 263, para 13 has only applied net profit rate. Therefore, the issue is not free from doubt of debatable and seems the Tribunal has confirmed the addition partly on adhoc basic and without considering the loss incurred, at least there is no question of levying penalty even in reference to the addition confirmed by Tribunal at ₹ 14,19,919/-. The estimation made by the Tribunal is partly adhoc in nature. 5.1. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that neither the transactions were not disclosed nor the Bank Account No.10011001005255 in which the cash deposits have been made were disclosed to the Revenue Authorities. The only explanation for not disclosing the transactions are that there was los ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
