9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 734X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... u/s 139(1) had not expired and assessee had also not filed his return of income upto the date of survey. The fact of “concealment of income” and “furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income” can be established only with reference to the income declared in the return of income. In the present case, since the income declared by the assessee in the return of income has been accepted, there cannot be the case of “concealing the particulars of income” or “furnishing the inaccurate particulars of income”. The case of Dr. Ranjana, the wife of assessee, penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) on the additional income declared out of the same survey was deleted by the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal [2019 (2) TMI 352 - ITAT PUNE]. - Decided against re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onducted, the assessee would have never offered such additional income in the return of income. He accordingly held that assessee is liable for penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act and vide penalty order dated 15.05.015 levied penalty of ₹ 46,22,600/-. Aggrieved by the order of AO, assessee carried the matter before Ld.CIT(A), who vide order dt.25.10.2016 (in appeal No.PN/CIT(A)-13/ACIT Cir-09/104/2016-17) deleted the penalty. Aggrieved by the order of Ld.CIT(A), Revenue is now in appeal before us and has raised the following grounds : 1. Whether in facts and circumstances of the case the Ld . CIT(A) was justified in deleting the pen a lty levied of Rs . 46,22,600/ - when the addition on which the penalty was levied was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d in levying the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. Ld.A.R. on the other hand, reiterated the submissions made before AO and Ld.CIT(A) and further submitted that on identical facts resulting out of the same survey, addition was also made in the case of Dr. Ranjana, the wife of assessee. On such addition, penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act was levied by the AO. The Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal vide order dt.01.02.2019 in ITA No.91/PUN/2017 had dismissed the appeal of Revenue. He placed on record the copy of the aforesaid order. He therefore relying on the order of Tribunal in the case of assessee s wife supported the order of Ld.CIT(A). 5. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The issue in the present g ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
