9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 584X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Income Tax Act by the Assessing Officer. 3. The brief facts of the case are that assessee has filed his return of income on 31-10-2005 declaring total income at Rs. 2,42,150/-. The assessee at the relevant time was running two proprietorships namely; (a) Real Securities and Detective Services and (b) Real Industries Commandoes. The main business of the assessee was of providing security services. He has shown turn-over of Rs. 72,25,257/- in Real Securities and Rs. 1,90,709/- in Real Industries Commandoes. On scrutiny of the accounts, it revealed to the Assessing Officer that there is a discrepancy in the gross receipts shown by the assessee vis-à-vis the gross receipts available in the TDS certificate. He confronted the assessee a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hese receipts in Assessment Year 2006-07. The attention of ld. Assessing Officer was withdrawn towards the computation of income for Assessment Year 2006- 07. With regard to the estimated addition of net profit, it was contended that in Assessment Year 2004-05, the assessee has declared losses but Assessing Officer has estimated the profit at 8%. In Assessment Year 2005-06, it has declared profit at Rs. 2.15% which is enhanced by the Assessing Officer at 8%. Therefore, no penalty as such is imposable. . 7. With the assistance of Ld. Representatives, we have gone through the record carefully. Section 271(1)(c) of the Act has a direct bearing on the controversy and, therefore, it is salutary upon us to take note of the relevant provisions of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g the total income or such person as a result thereof shall, for the purposes of Clause (c) of this sub-section, be deemed to represent the income in respect of which particulars have been concealed." 8. A bare perusal of this section would reveal that for visiting any assessee with the penalty, the Assessing Officer or the Learned CIT(Appeals) during the course of any proceedings before them should be satisfied, that the assessee has; (i) concealed his income or furnished inaccurate particulars of income. As far as the quantification of the penalty is concerned, the penalty imposed under this section can range in between 100% to 300% of the tax sought to be evaded by the assessee, as a result of such concealment of income or furnishing in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... deeming fiction would come to play by the failure of the assessee to substantiate his explanation in respect of any fact material to the computation of total income and in addition to this the assessee is not able to prove that such explanation was given bona fide and all the facts relating to the same and material to the computation of the total income have been disclosed by the assessee. These two situations provided in Explanation 1 appended to section 271(1)(c) makes it clear that that when this deeming fiction comes into play in the above two situations then the related addition or disallowance in computing the total income of the assessee for the purpose of section 271(1)(c) would be deemed to be representing the income in respect of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
