9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (7) TMI 713X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ngs. However, as far as initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271AAB is concerned, the same has been initiated on the whole of the sum of ₹ 6 lacs admitted by the assessee pursuant to search. Second contention of the ld AR that the assessee had cash in hand of ₹ 80,000/- as on 31.03.2013 and the same has been utilized in making the investment for purchase of land. What needs to be seen is the source of investment at the point in time when the investment was made. In the instant case, the sale deed has been registered on 5.4.2012, therefore, what needs to be seen is whether the assessee was having sufficient cash in hand on or before 5.4.2012 reflected in its books of accounts to make such investment, however, there is nothing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 00,000/- on A/c of undisclosed investment in Land as per documents seized from residence of Shri B.D. Mundra at 524A, Talwandi, Kota and inventorised as Exhibit-13, Page 45-49 of Annexure-AS, which is a copy of registered sale/purchase deed dated 05.04.2012, regarding industrial land purchased by the assessee. This disclosure was made through a chart furnished by Shri Anil Mundra, brother of the assessee during the course of post search proceeding on 18.11.2013. 7.1 However, the assessee had offered income of ₹ 5,20,000/- in the revised return filed on 09.11.2013 for taxation. 7.2 Out of undisclosed income admitted of ₹ 6,00,000/- by the assessee, income of ₹ 5.20 Lakh has been admitted and declared in the revise ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... estment in the Industrial Land as per revised return of income as under: Cash available as on 31.03.2013 ₹ 82,561 Add: Undisclosed income ₹ 5,20,000 ₹ 6,02,561 Less : Investment in Industrial Land ₹ 6,00,000 Revised Cash in hand on 31.03.2013 ₹ 2,561 5. It was submitted by the ld AR that the AO has not disputed the amount of investment for purchase of Industrial Land amounting to ₹ 6,00,000/- appearing in the revised balance-sheet. The AO has also not disputed the fact that available cash in hand and ad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... proceedings. It was accordingly submitted that the penalty proceedings u/s 271AAB were initiated for the whole of the undisclosed income of ₹ 6,00,000/- and it is incorrect on the part of the ld. AR to state that the penalty has been initiated only in relation to the additional income of ₹ 80,000/- brought to tax by the Assessing Officer. Further, our reference was drawn to the findings of the ld CIT(A) which read as under:- 6.3 The income of ₹ 6,00,000/- being unexplained investment in land, in respect of which penalty has been levied, was detected because a copy of registered sale/purchase deed dated 05.04.2012, regarding purchase of industrial land by the assessee for ₹ 6,00,000/- was found during search. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ty u/s 271AAB has been levied, income of ₹ 5,20,000/- was offered to tax in the return of income filed before issue of notice u/s 153A. There is no dispute about this fact, and therefore in respect of the income of ₹ 5,20,000/-, which was declared in the ROI filed before issue of notice u/s 153A, the assessee satisfies the condition (iii) above. However, at no stage, including in the present appellate proceedings, has the assessee specified the manner in which the income of ₹ 5,20,000/-was derived, much less substantiate such manner. Therefore conditions (ii) and (ii) above, also required to be met for levy of penalty at the lower rate of 10%, under clause (a) of Section 271AAB(1), are not satisfied in the assessee's ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... disclosed a sum of ₹ 5.2 lacs in the revised return filed on 9.11.2013, subsequent to date of search and thereafter, in the return filed on 16.02.2015 in response to notice u/s 153A, the Assessing officer has brought the balance amount of ₹ 80,000/- to tax during the course of assessment proceedings. However, as far as initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271AAB is concerned, the same has been initiated on the whole of the sum of ₹ 6 lacs admitted by the assessee pursuant to search. 8. Regarding the second contention of the ld AR that the assessee had cash in hand of ₹ 80,000/- as on 31.03.2013 and the same has been utilized in making the investment for purchase of land. In our view, what needs to be seen is the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
