9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 1057X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uch valuation difference and on account of non-deduction of Chapadi, wax, etc while weighing the Kundan Meena Jewellery and the same cannot be a basis to hold that it represent undisclosed income so defined in explanation to section 271AAB and the penalty levied thereon is liable to be set-aside. Surrender made on account of cash advances for land purchases in the statement recorded u/s 132(4) undisclosed investment by way of advance for purchase of land can be subject matter of addition in the quantum proceedings, as the same has been surrendered during the course of search in the statement recorded u/s 132(4) and offered in the return of income, however the same cannot be said to qualify as an undisclosed income in the context of section 271AAB read with the explanation thereto and penalty so levied thereon deserved to be set-aside. Surrender on account of other discrepancies, in absence of any such discrepancy so found by the Assessing officer either during the assessment or penalty proceedings, the said surrender may be the basis for assessment but can’t form the basis for levy of penalty in absence of a specific finding as to how the same qualify as an undisclosed inco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessee firm is part of the said group. Subsequently, the assessee furnished its return of income on 01.10.2014 declaring total income of ₹ 5,91,64,560/- which includes income of ₹ 5,73,33,348/- which was surrendered during the course of search proceedings. In the return of income, the assessee also disclosed an amount of ₹ 1,77,039/- which, as per the Assessing officer, represents the undisclosed income of the assessee firm. The Assessing officer thereafter completed the assessment U/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153(1)(b) of the Act vide order dated 16.03.2016 at a total income of ₹ 5,93,25,040/-. The Assessing officer simultaneously initiated the penalty proceeding in relation to undisclosed income by way of issuance of notice dated 16.03.2016 U/s 271AAB of the Act. 3. Subsequently, during penalty proceeding, a fresh show cause notice dated 17.08.2016 was issued to the assessee. In response, the assessee submitted that the additional income was duly declared in the return of income filed U/s 139(1) of the I.T. Act and therefore, the same cannot be treated as concealed income of the assesee. It was further submitted that the Department has carried out search and se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r possible discrepancies totaling to ₹ 5,75,10,387/-. It was further submitted that the additional income so declared in the return of income cannot be treated as concealed income of the assessee as the Department has not found any evidence, which shows that the assessee was having some source of undisclosed income. It was further submitted that the assessee cooperated with the department and true disclosure of income was made, the intention was to avoid litigation and buy peace and the disclosure was not based on any material gathered as a result of search but the same was suo-moto surrendered by the assessee. It was further submitted that the provisions of Section 271AAB are pari materia to Section 271AAA in so far as both the provisions are discretionary in nature and given the facts and circumstances of the present case, the penalty should not be levied. 6. The ld. CIT(A) considered the assessee s submission, however, the same were not found acceptable to him. The ld. CIT(A) held that the penalty provisions U/s 271AAB were introduced for search and seizure conducted on or after 01.07.2012 to strengthen the penal provisions. It was stated by the ld. CIT(A) that unlike S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unity i.e. to be given should be meaningful one and not a farce. It was submitted that the ld. AO initiated the penalty u/s 271AAB of Income Tax Act, 1961 without specifying the clause of section 271AAB of the Act in the assessment order and penalty notice under which the penalty was initiated i.e. whether it is for clause (a) or clause (b) or clause (c) of section 271AAB(1). The conditions for imposing the penalty under each such clauses are separate therefore, the cause of the default should be specified while initiation of penalty in assessment order as well as in the notice issued u/s 274 of I.Tax Act. In this regard, our attention was drawn towards the initiation of penalty in assessment order and notice issued under section 274 read with section 271AAB as under: a) Initiation of penalty in Assessment Order:- The ld. AO initiated the penalty proceeding u/s 271AAB of Income Tax Act in the assessment order dated 16-03-2016. The ld AO initiated penalty by mentioning that:- It is pertinent to mention here that the search operation relevant to this case has been conducted 04-09-2013 i.e. FY 2013-14 relevant to AY 2014-15. This date of initiation of search u/s 132 of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (b). Therefore, the imposition of penalty under Section 271AAB(1)(a) and 271AAB(1)(b) is void ab-initio and bad in law in as much as no opportunity to be heard has been provided by the Ld. AO before imposition of the penalty as the notice itself is vague. 11. It was submitted that Ld. AO has not recorded his satisfaction in the assessment order as to under what circumstances or manner the provisions of Section 271AAB(1)(a) and 271AAB(1)(b) are attracted in the case of Appellant. Further, it is relevant that Ld. AO has not discussed the default of the Appellant attracting the provisions of Section 271AAB(1)(a) and 271AAB(1)(b). The assessment has been completed accepting the returned income. Therefore, without recording his satisfaction, Ld. AO was not justified in initiating penalty proceedings under Section 271AAB(1) and imposing penalty under Section 271AAB(1)(a) and 271AAB(1)(b) of the Act. 12. It was submitted that the Ld. AO could not have asked the Appellant to show cause for all the three different clauses of Section 271AAB(1) of the IT Act. It is well-settled principle of law that the Appellant should have been specifically asked to reply on default with reference to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in ITA No. 1199/CHN/2017 dated 05.04.2018, wherein Hon ble ITAT in the said order while considering the validity of show cause notice and initiation of proceedings under section 271AAB and following the decision of Hon ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs. Manjunatha Cotton Ginning Factory (supra) as well as the decision of Hon ble Supreme Court dismissing the SLP filed by the revenue in the case of CIT vs. SSA s Emerald Meadows, 242 Taxman 150 (SC) held that the notice issued under section 274 read with section 271AAB of the Act not specifying the ground and clauses for levy of penalty was not valid and consequently the penalty order was set aside. Reliance is also placed on the decision of Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Sheveta Construction Co. Pvt Ltd in DBIT Appeal No. 534/2008 dated 06.12.2016, decisions of the Co-ordinate Bench in case of Shri Dinesh Kumar Agarwal v/s. ACIT, Central Circle-1, Jaipur (ITA No. 855 856/JP/2017 dated 24.07.2018), Shri Ravi Mathur Vs. DCIT, Central Circle-4, 2018 (6) TMI 1128, Shri Anil Mathur V. DCIT, Central Circle-4, Jaipur 2018 (6) TMI 1311 and Shri Suresh Chand Mittal Vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2, Jaipur, 2018 ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion (1) to Section 271AAB. Merely because the quantum of penalty varies from 10% to 30% subject to compliances with the ancilliary conditions, it cannot be said that where the AO has initiated the penalty under section 271AAB, there is any ambiguity in the charge or there is any lack of application of mind on part of the Assessing officer. Further, the levy of penalty under Section 271AAB is not based on addition made and investigation/enquiry conducted during the course of assessment proceedings, rather it is based on search conducted on the assessee on or after the 1st day of July, 2012, in such a situation, where the penalty show-cause notice is issued u/s 271AAB, the Assessing officer is making the assessee aware of the charge against him in terms of undisclosed income found during the course of search and thus, the assessee is granted an opportunity to refute such charge and file his explanations/submissions. Unlike provisions of section 271(1)(c) which provides for separate charge of concealment of particulars of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income , there is a singular charge under section 271AAB i.e, of the existence of undisclosed income for the spe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ar, if such assessee- (i) in the course of the search, in a statement under sub-section (4) of section 132 , does not admit the undisclosed income; and (ii) on or before the specified date- (A) declares such income in the return of income furnished for the specified previous year; and (B) pays the tax, together with interest, if any, in respect of the undisclosed income; (c) a sum which shall not be less than thirty percent but which shall not exceed ninety percent of the undisclosed income of the specified previous year, if it is not covered by the provisions of clauses (a) and (b). (2) No penalty under the provisions of clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 271 shall be imposed upon the assessee in respect of the undisclosed income referred to in sub-section (1) or sub-section (1A). (3) The provisions of sections 274 and 275 shall, as far as may be, apply in relation to the penalty referred to in this section. Explanation.-For the purposes of this section,- (a) specified date means the due date of furnishing of return of income under sub-section (1) of section 139 or the date on which the period specified in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t to satisfaction of other conditions, penalty @ 20% is payable by him. It further provides that where the declaration of undisclosed income is neither made by the searched person in the course of search nor declared in the return of income furnished for the specified previous year and additions are made during the course of assessment proceedings, penalty which can vary from 30% to 90% is payable by him. 13. Both the provisions as contained in section 271AAB(1)(a) and 271AAB(1)(c) thus provides for levy of penalty in cases where search has been initiated under section 132 on or after the 1st day of July, 2012 and quantum of penalty has been kept at 10% where there is declaration in the statement recorded during the course of search, and where there is neither a declaration in the statement u/s 132(4) recorded during the course of search nor a declaration in the return of income, the penalty has been kept at a higher pedestal which can vary from 30% to 90%. Further, it is noted that the provisions of section 271AAB overrides section 271(1)(c) which infact contain provisions for levy of penalty under two separate limbs- concealment of particulars of income or furnishing ina ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has also been cited by the ld AR in the instant case, it was held as under: 15. The moot question is that what should be the nature of specification of a charge by the AO at the stage of initiation of penalty proceedings and at the time of passing the penalty order. Is the AO required to specify in the penalty notice/order as to whether it is a case of 'concealment of particulars of income'; or 'furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income'; or both of them, which can be expressed by using the word 'and' between the two expressions. When the AO is satisfied that it is a clear-cut case of concealment of particulars of income, he must specify it so in the notice at the time of initiation of penalty proceedings and also in the penalty order. The AO cannot initiate penalty on the charge of 'concealment of particulars of income', but ultimately find the assessee guilty in the penalty order of 'furnishing inaccurate particulars of income'. In the same manner, he cannot be uncertain in the penalty order as to concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income by using slash between the two expressions. When the AO is satisfie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nding him guilty for either the one or the other cannot be sustained in law .. Thus once the proceedings are initiated on one ground, the penalty should also be imposed on the same ground. Where the basis of the initiation of penalty proceedings is not identical with the ground on which the penalty was imposed, the imposition of penalty is not valid'. 17. In Manu Engg. Works (supra) penalty was imposed by noting: 'that the assessee had concealed its income and/or that it had furnished inaccurate particulars of such income'. Striking down the penalty, the Hon'ble High Court held that: 'it was incumbent upon the IAC to come to a positive finding as to whether there was concealment of income by the assessee or whether any inaccurate particulars of such income had been furnished by the assessee. No such clear-cut finding was reached by the IAC and, on that ground alone, the order of penalty passed by the IAC was liable to be struck down.' 18. In Padma Ram Bharali (supra), the Hon'ble High Court did not sustain penalty levied u/s. 271(l)(c) when: 'the initiation of the penalty proceeding was for concealment of the particulars of income. But the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... If on the other hand, if the penalty is initiated with an uncertain charge of 'concealment of particulars of income/furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income' etc., but the assessee is ultimately found to be guilty of a specific charge of either 'concealment of particulars of income' or 'furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income', then no fault can be found in the penalty order. 22. In Manu Engineering Works (supra), the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court noticed that the charge at the stage of initiation of penalty proceedings as well in the penalty order was uncertain and the expression used at both the stages was concealment of particulars of income and/or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of such income. It struck down the penalty by holding that the assessee must have been found to be guilty of a certain charge in the penalty order. It, however, did not find anything amiss with the initiation of penalty on such uncertain charge, which is vivid from the following observations : - 'We find from the order of the IAC, in the penalty proceedings, that is, the final conclusion as expressed in para. 4 of the order: I am of the opinion t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n laid down by the Hon ble Rajasthan High Court in case of Shweta Construction (supra). Hence, following the same, we donot see any infirmity in the initiation of penalty proceedings and consequent penalty order so passed by the Assessing officer and the contentions so raised by the ld AR in this regard cannot be accepted. Further, we find that the decision of the Coordinate Benches so relied upon by the ld AR, have been rendered without taking into consideration earlier decision of the Co-ordinate Bench in case of Mahesh Jain (Supra) and earlier decision of the larger Bench of the Tribunal in case of ONGC Mittal (Supra) and thus doesn t act as a binding precedent. In light of above discussions, the additional ground so raised by the assessee is hereby dismissed. 22. Now, coming to the merits of levy of penalty. During the course of search, the particular of income in the hands of the assessee which was surrendered in the statement recorded u/s 132(4) of Act is as under: S.No Particulars Amount (Rs) (i) On account of excess stock found at the premises of assessee 4,36,33, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e date of search in the books of account or other documents maintained in the normal course relating to such previous year; or (B) otherwise not been disclosed to the Chief Commissioner or Commissioner before the date of the search; or (ii) any income of the specified previous year represented, either wholly or partly, by any entry in respect of an expense recorded in the books of account or other documents maintained in the normal course relating to the specified previous year which is found to be false and would not have been found to be so had the search not been conducted. 24. It was submitted that the additional business income declared in the income Tax return filed u/s 139(1) of Income Tax Act, 1961, cannot be treated as Undisclosed Income within the specific meaning given in section 271AAB. The Department carried out search and seizure operations over assessee group and during the course of the search, the Department has not found any evidence of unaccounted purchase/sales or source of undisclosed income. The disclosure of additional income was bona-fide disclosure by the assessee in order to buy peace and avoid prolonged litigation. During the course of as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as declared additional Income of ₹ 5,75,10,387/- shown as Income surrendered during the search in Profit Loss Account out of which ₹ 4,38,10,387/- stated as against excess stock. The ld AO has not determined it as income from other sources u/s 69 of Income Tax Act in the assessment but accepted as business income of current year. Now the mute question arise, whether the excess stock represents unaccounted purchases or difference on account of valuation of stock at the time of search at market value as against the cost. (i) No document of unaccounted purchase/sales was found:- At the outset, we submit that the department has carried out the intensive search operations over the assessee and no document was found to show unaccounted purchases of stock. Neither any entry in the books of account was found to show unaccounted purchases or sales nor any loose document was found to show the unaccounted purchases. (ii) Excess stock is result of valuation of stock at Market rate as on the date of search as against cost. The excess stock was arrived by valuation of stock at market rate as on 04/09/2013. The gold rate was taken by the valuer at ₹ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ock by ₹ 84,01,107/- Hence, there could not be any excess stock. However, the difference was on account of valuation which was accepted by the assessee in order to avoid litigation and honor search statement. However, in any way, this could not be termed as undisclosed income, but it is preponment of accounting of income. (iii) Excess stock in quantity was on account of not giving proper deduction for Chapadi etc by valuer at Jaipur. During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee has challenged the valuation of the jewellery stock lying at Jaipur office vide letter dated 15/12/2015 as under:- Further, Kundan Meena jewellery is special jewellery quite different to ordinary jewellery. Kundan Meena jewellery also has wax, colour stones, tassels, semi precious stones, silver and diamonds. Therefore, the valuation should have been made by adjusting the gross weight for wax, tassels and other impurities. In Jaipur, the valuation of Kundan jewellery was made in totality without specifying the individual item and without giving the deduction for wax, tassels and other impurities. The valuer at Jaipur office/shop valued the jewellery at the rate of fine gold ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee firm. The assessee has declared additional business Income of ₹ 5,75,10,387/- for current year shown as Income surrendered during the search in Profit Loss Account out of which ₹ 5,00,000/- represents cash. The ld AO has not determined it as income from other sources u/s 69 of Income Tax Act in the assessment but accepted as business income of current year. Therefore, merely on the basis of surrender made in the search statement, this cannot be held as Undisclosed Income for the purpose of levy of penalty u/s 271AAB. c) Advance against purchase of land ₹ 1,12,00,000/- During the course of search under section 132 though loose document was found and seized during the search which contains the advances given by the assessee for purchase of land. However, the said entry in the loose paper giving advances for purchase of land itself is not an undisclosed income. The assessee has declared additional business Income of ₹ 5,75,10,387/- for current year shown as Income surrendered during the search in Profit Loss Account out of which ₹ 1,12,00,000/- represents as utilized in advance against purchase of land. The ld AO has not de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... corded in the regular books of account found at the time of search. The accounting year of the assessee was not completed as on the date of the search. Further, the profit can be declared only after end of the year. After the end of the year, final account are prepared and only after that profit can be ascertained. 28. It was further submitted that the levy of penalty u/s 271AAB is discretionary not mandatory in nature. It is submitted that the AO while passing the order under section 271AAB has to examine the case in terms of the provisions of said section and, therefore, the levy of penalty under section 271AAB is not automatic but discretionary. The provisions of section 271AAB itself speak that these are not mandatory. In section 271AAB the term The AO may is used, which shows the levy of penalty is not mandatory. The section states that the Assessing Officer MAY direct. Thus it is not SHALL which would have made the levy of penalty mandatory. Thus the ld. CIT (A) was wrong in observing that levy of penalty u/s 271AAB was mandatory. Secondly the provisions of section 271AAB(3) lay down that penalty shall be levied under the section with reference to section 274. In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y out a statutory obligation is the result of a quasi-criminal proceeding and penalty will not ordinarily be imposed unless the party obliged, either acted deliberately in defiance of law or was guilty of conduct contumacious or dishonest, or acted in conscious disregard of its obligation. Penalty will not also be imposed merely because it is lawful to do so. Whether penalty should be imposed for failure to perform a statutory obligation is a matter of discretion of the authority to be exercised judicially and on a consideration of all the relevant circumstances. Even if a minimum penalty is prescribed, the authority competent to impose the penalty will be justified in refusing to impose penalty, when there is a technical or venial breach of the provisions of the Act or where the breach flows from a bona fide belief that the offender is not liable to act in the manner prescribed by the statute. 32. Per contra, the ld. DR submitted that the assessee has surrendered the undisclosed income in its statement recorded u/s 132(4) and therefore, there cannot be any question of said surrender of income not falling in the definition of undisclosed income. It was submitted that the penal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mandatory. The Ld. A.R. further stated that penalty u/s 271AAB of the Act is not mandatory but discretionary. The provisions of section 271AAB of the Act is parimateria with that of section 158BFA of the Act relating to block assessment and accordingly argued that the levy of penalty under section 271AAB is not mandatory but discretionary. When there is reasonable cause, the penalty is not exigible. The Ld. A.R. taken us to the section 271AAB of the Act and also section 158BFA(2) of the Act and argued that the words used in section 271AAB of the Act and the words used in section 158BFA(2) of the Act are identical. Hence, argued that the penalty section 271AAB of the Act penalty is not automatic and it is on the merits of each case. For ready reference, we reproduce hereunder section 158BFA (2) of the Act and section 271AAB of the Act which reads as under: 271AAB [Penalty where search has been initiated]: (1) The Assessing Officer may, notwithstanding anything contained in any other provisions of this Act, direct that, in a case where search has been initiated under section 132 on or after the 1st day of July, 2012, the assessee shall pay by way of penalty, in a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Evidence of tax paid is furnished along with the return; and (iv) An appeal is not filed against the assessment of that part of income which is shown in the return: Provided further that the provisions of the preceding proviso shall not apply where the undisclosed income determined by the Assessing Officer is in excess of the income shown in the return and in such cases the penalty shall be imposed on that portion of undisclosed income determined which is in excess of the amount of undisclosed income shown in the return. 6. Careful reading of section 271AAB of the Act, the words used are 'AO may direct' and 'the assessee shall pay by way of penalty'. Similar words are used section 158BFA(2) of the Act. The word may direct indicates the discretion to the AO. Further, sub section (3) of section 271AAB of the Act, fortifies this view. Sub section (3) of section 271AAB: The provisions of section 274 and 275 shall, as far as may be, apply in relation to the penalty referred to in this section. 7. The legislature has included the provisions of section 274 and section 275 of the Act in 271AAB of the Act with clear intention to consider t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he hands of the assessee. In this regard, we refer to the assessment order wherein the Assessing officer has stated that the partners of the assessee firm had accepted undisclosed income in their statements recorded u/s 132(4), thereafter, the statements were again recorded during the post-search proceedings and there is nothing on record which suggest any retraction on part of the assessee, and subsequently, the assessee has disclosed the same in its return of income filed on 1.10.2014. Therefore, the assessee was having ample time to retract from said surrender, however there is no such retraction during post-search proceedings and even the assessee has included the same in its return of income. Even from the perusal of the statements so recorded of the partners of the assessee firm, there is nothing which in any way suggests that there is any forced surrender by the assessee. The contention of the ld AR therefore has no legal leg to stand where he contends that the Revenue authorities have exerted undue pressure on the assessee and obtained surrender of income and therefore, there was no undisclosed income in the hands of the assessee. In any case, the assessment proceedings hav ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... out considering the well-accepted accounting policy which has been followed by the assessee firm where it values its stock at lower of cost and net realizable value. The cost can be determined on the basis of historical and/or current cost so recorded in the books of accounts. Alternatively, past gross profit percentage can also give a reasonable basis for determining such cost. In the instant case, the ld AR has contended that where gross profit of the past year determined at the rate of 13.92% is used and applied to the stock valued by the Revenue at the current market value, it will result in a scenario where the stock as per books of account is higher than the stock valued at the time of search. As per computation prepared which we have noted above, we find that stock (including stock of silver jewellery) as per books of accounts comes to ₹ 35,11,24,031 as against ₹ 34,27,22,924 valued by the Department at the time of search and therefore, contention so advanced by the ld AR is found reasonable. Another aspect which has been submitted by the assessee relates to non-deduction on account of chapadi, wax etc for the Kundan Meena Jewellery while physically weighing t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the date of search on 4.9.2013. Therefore, what has been found during the course of search is certain entries relating to undisclosed investment in purchase of land. Besides the said entries, there are no other documents/material in terms of any agreement to sell, the description of the property etc, which has been found during the course of search. As per the definition of undisclosed income u/s 271AAB, the undisclosed investment in so called purchase of land cannot be stated to be income which is represented by any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing. Whether it can then be said that such undisclosed investment represents income by way of any entry in the books of account or other documents or transactions found in the course of a search under section 132. An investment per se represents an outflow of funds from the assessee s hand and an income per se represents an inflow of funds in the hands of the assessee. Therefore, once there is an inflow of funds by way of income, there could be subsequent outflow by way of investment. Investment and income thus connotes different meaning and connotation and thus cannot be used inter-changeably. In the defi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the undisclosed investment by way of advance for purchase of land can be subject matter of addition in the quantum proceedings, as the same has been surrendered during the course of search in the statement recorded u/s 132(4) and offered in the return of income, however the same cannot be said to qualify as an undisclosed income in the context of section 271AAB read with the explanation thereto and penalty so levied thereon deserved to be set-aside. 40. Regarding surrender of ₹ 7,29,139 made on account of other discrepancies, in absence of any such discrepancy so found by the Assessing officer either during the assessment or penalty proceedings, the said surrender may be the basis for assessment but can t form the basis for levy of penalty in absence of a specific finding as to how the same qualify as an undisclosed income so defined u/s 271AAB of the Act. Hence, penalty levied thereon is liable to be set-aside. 41. Regarding surrender of cash of ₹ 5 lacs found from the residence of the partners and which has been admitted as belonging to the assessee firm in statement recorded u/s 132(4) and not found recorded in the books of accounts at the time of search, there ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
