9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (1) TMI 214X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the AO u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act in respect of all the assessment years under consideration. Accordingly, the decision taken by CIT (A) vide paras 5.6 and 5.7 of his order is fair and reasonable. However, as contended by the Ld Counsel for the assessee the penalty levied by the AO @ 200% of the tax to be evaded by reason of concealment of income is on higher side and therefore, considering the factual matrix of the present case, we direct the AO to restrict the penalty to 100% of the tax to be evaded instead of 200% levied by him, which in our considered opinion would meet the ends of justice. - Decided in favour of assessee partly - ITA Nos.6239 TO 6243/M/2014, ITA Nos. 6172 to 6176/M/2013 - - - Dated:- 16-10-2015 - SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER For The Assessee : Shri R.N. Vasani For The Revenue : Shir Yashwant Chavan, CIT-DR ORDER PER B ENCH: There are ten appeals under consideration. All these appeals are filed by the assessee involving the assessment years 2002-03 to 2006-07 against the common order of the CIT (A)-37, Mumbai dated 31.7.2014. Since, the issues raised by the assessee in all the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iled an appeal before the first appellate authority. After considering the submissions of the assessee, CIT (A) partly allowed the appeal vide his order dated 8.2.2011. Accordingly, AO, giving effect to the said order of the CIT (A), passed order dated 14.3.2011, wherein the assessed income was determined at ₹ 88,41,388/- including the agricultural income of ₹ 3,90,083/-. Again aggrieved, assessee filed an appeal before the Tribunal. In the first round of proceedings, ITAT vide its order in appeal ITA No.3310 to 3316/Mum/2011 dated 29.8.2012 directed the AO to make additions of unaccounted bank account on the basis of the peak credit of all the bank accounts after considering the unexplained investment sourced from these bank accounts to the extent of peak credit available in bank accounts for that particular assessment year. In the remand proceedings, AO did not accept the working of the assessee and worked out the peak credit of ₹ 69,30,609/- after reducing the closing balance in bank account of ₹ 8,97,248/-. Accordingly, in the process, AO passed the assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s 254 of the Act on 24.10.2013 and determined the total income of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... T (A) held that the action of the Assessing Officer in actually taking balance at the end of the year, in any case, is totally incorrect. Accordingly, he directed the AO to consider the computation of incremental peak for the respective assessment years computed and produced before him and worked out the peak balance. He further directed the AO that the income considered is inclusive of agricultural income. Further, the assessee‟s argument that in respect of Kothari Group, the amount assessed as commission should be excluded since the transactions are covered in the peak based on closing balances as per bank accounts, was rejected by the assessee. Thus, CIT (A) partly allowed the assessee‟s appeal. Assessee is aggrieved against the inclusion of the regular income in the assessed income in addition to the regular peak credit related additions. Aggrieved and dissatisfied with the said decision of the CIT (A), assessee is in further appeal before the Tribunal by raising the above mentioned grounds. 6. During the proceedings before us, Ld Counsel for the assessee reiterated the submissions made before the lower authorities. It is the contention of the assessee that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... present appeals to that of the ones raised in its appeal for the AY 2002-2003, our decision given therein squarely applies to the present appeal too. Considering the same, we uphold the decision of CIT (A) and dismiss the appeal instant appeals of the assessee. Accordingly, all the grounds raised by the assessee in the appeals under consideration for the AYs 2003-04 to 2006-07 are dismissed. 11. In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed. ITA No. 6172/M/2013 (AY 2002-2003) ITA No. 6173/M/2013 (AY 2003-2004) ITA No. 6174/M/2013 (AY 2004-2005) ITA No. 6175/M/2013 (AY 2005-2006) ITA No. 6176/M/2013 (AY 2006-2007) 12. These five appeals are filed by the assessee against the common order of the CIT (A)-37, Mumbai dated 23.8.2013. In these appeals, assessee raised the common grounds in all the AYs under consideration. Considering the commonality of the grounds raised by the assessee, for the sake of reference and adjudication purpose, the grounds raised by the assessee for the AY 2002-2003 are reproduced as under: 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and as well as in law, the Ld CIT (A) has erred in confi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ‟ble ITAT set aside the assessment orders passed u/s 153A of the Act, and therefore, the quantum orders do not survive. In this regard, assessee relied on the decision of the ITAT, Special Bench in the case of S. Manmohan Singh vs. IAC in support of his contention. After considering the submissions of the assessee and on perusal of the ITAT‟s order dated 29.8.2012 (supra) in the first round of the proceedings, CIT (A) came to the conclusion that vide the said order (supra), the Tribunal only directed the AO for the purpose of computation of amounts of additions and the assessments have not been set aside. Accordingly, vide paras 5.6 and 5.7 of his order, CIT (A) held as under: 5.6. During the appellate proceedings, the AR did not offer any submission on merits in respect of penalty imposed in this case. I have therefore, no hesitation in upholding the penalty orders passed by the AO for all these assessment years. At the same time, penalty should be computed with respect to undisclosed income to be determined in terms of the directions of the Hon‟ble ITAT while giving effect to its order. 5.7. To clarify, the penalty orders passed by the Assessing Offic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
