9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (8) TMI 607X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s that he has submitted the details, what is the nature of the details also not being coming out of the reply filed by the assessee. It is in the absence of the details being filed, the addition has been made in the course of original assessment. It is because of non-production of the details that the addition has got sustained also. A perusal of the order of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the assessee s own case in the quantum proceedings show that explanation has not been given. The Tribunal has also categorically given a finding that the assessee has not produced any evidence in support of her claim. This being so, even the decision of the Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of Nayan Builders and Developers [ 2014 (7) TMI 11 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the assessee had introduced additional capital to an extent of ₹ 26,43,128/- in the balance sheet for the year ended 31.03.2008. On the ground that the assessee was unable to explain the source for the additional capital introduced, the Assessing Officer had added the same to the total income of the assessee. Similarly, on the ground that the assessee was unable to prove the genuineness of the expenditure claimed towards consultancy charges of ₹ 45,000/-, the Assessing Officer had added the same. It was the submission that on appeal, the Ld.CIT(A) had reduced the addition on account of the additional capital introduced to ₹ 18,05,759/-. It was further submission that on appeal before the ITAT, the Tribunal confirmed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... It was the submission that without the details have been produced nor proper explanations have been given in respect of the additions, the penalty levied was not liable to be cancelled. 5. We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the decision of the Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court of Madras in the case of Shri Kamal Basha, shows that in Para 15, the Hon ble High Court has categorically given a finding that there was no allegation made against the assessee that the statement given by the assessee was either mala fide or lacks bonafide. There was no allegation against the assessee that he suppressed information to the Department with an intent to evade payment of tax. The details called for by the Assessing Officer during the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts that have led to the addition are not being explained by the assessee. However, considering the fact that the assessee has asked for another opportunity to explain her case before the Assessing Officer, in the interest of justice, the issues in the appeal are restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for re-adjudication of the penalty proceedings after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. The assessee shall provide all the details as called for and as required to substantiate her case for non-levy of penalty U/s.271(1)(c) of the Act. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on the 6th August, 2019 at Chennai. - - TaxTMI - TMITa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
