9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (12) TMI 801X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... filed by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 27.01.2019 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Ahmedabad arising out of the penalty order dated 31.03.2016 passed by the ITO, Ward 2(1)(2), Ahmedabad under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as to the Act ) for the Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2006-07 whereby and whereunder the penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( the Act ) passed by the Ld. AO has been deleted. 2. Penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act to the tune of ₹ 55,53,800/- is the issue before us. 3. Initially search action under Section 132 of the Act was carried out in the group cases of Riddhi Siddhi Group on 22.09.2011. Notice under Section 153C of the Act dated 23.08.2013 was issued to the assessee directing filing of return of income pursuant to that the return of income was filed on 16.09.2013 declaring ₹ 1,65,00,000/- including the income disclosed during the course of search under Section 132 of the Act of ₹ 1,65,00,000/- under the head income from other sources. It is also a fact that during the assessment proceeding the assessee submitted details ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... self. However, the assessee company opted not to do that instead, as a result of search, it was left with no option but to disclose the undisclosed income as a result of search action. This shows that deliberate intention on the part of the assessee company to conceal the true income and to evade tax. 6. It is also worthwhile to mention here that the assessee had consciously furnished inaccurate particulars of its income. In this case, Explanation 1 below 271(1)(c) is clearly applicable and it is a case of furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income and thereby concealing the true income. In support of the revenue reliance is placed on the following judicial pronouncements.- (i) The judgment of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of A.M Shah Co. Vs Commissioner of income-tax (2000) 108 Taxman 137 wherein it is held as under- The penal provisions would operate where there is a failure of duty to disclose fully and truly particulars of income, imposed under the Act and the rules there under. The duty is enjoined upon a person to make a correct and complete disclosure of his income and it is only when he fails in his duty by not disclosing his income ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nus cast upon him by adducing cogent and reliable evidences showing that in fact losses were genuinely deductible against the current year's income only and not against preceding years income only and not against preceding year's income. (iv) 44 Tax mann com 140( Mum) (trib) J.M Baxi and Co. (v) 43 Tax mann com 92(P H) Anish Kurnar (vi) 37 Tax mann.com 347(Del) HCIL Kalinde Arsspl (vii) 352 ITR 588 (Del) Splender Construction, (viii) 336 ITR 162 (Dei) ECS Ltd. (ix) 340 ITR 595 (Dei) Kanchenjunga Advertising (P) Ltd, (x) 41 Tax mann.com 447(All) U.P Matsya Vikas Nigam Ltd, (xi) 43 Tax mann.com 325(Mum) Smt Shantidevi Mahavir Prasad Gupta (xii) 46 Tax mann.com 89 (Mumbai) (Trib) Deloitle Consulting India (P) Ltd. (xiii) 48 Tax mann.com 145 (Mum) (Tnb) Mitusba Systems (India) (P) Ltd, (xiv) 54 Taxman.com 257 (Mum) Clariant Chemicals Ltd (India) (xv) 52 Taxmann com 248 (SC) Kuldeep Wines (xvi) 366 ITR 449 (Del) Global Associates 7. In view of the above, since it is established that the assesses has willfully and deliberately concealed income by not filing the return of income, th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tech Pvt. Ltd. 10000000 9500000 9800000 - 29300000 8 Vascroft Design Pvt. Ltd. - 9000000 12000000 - 21000000 Total 39750000 73300000 67100000 500000 180650000 8. The Ld. AR brought to our notice that out of the above companies the penalty imposed against Creelotex Engineering Pvt. Ltd. as appearing at Sr. No. 4 and also against Safari Biotech Pvt. Ltd., Telecon Infotech Pvt. Ltd. and Vascroft Design Pvt. Ltd. appearing at Sr. Nos. 6, 7 8 respectively in the chart were challenged by the assessee before the Hon ble Tribunal. 9. We also find by and under an order dated 15.02.2019 in IT(SS)A Nos. 129 130/Ahd/2015 for A.Y. 2007-08 2008-09 in the case of Vascroft Design Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT and IT(SS)A Nos. 131, 132 133/Ahd/2015 for A.Y. 2006-07, 2007-08 2008-09 in the case of T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nts or other documents or transaction represent his income from any previous year, which has ended before the date of search, then notwithstanding such income is declared by him in any return of income furnished on or after the date of search, he shall for the purposes of imposition of a penalty under clause (c) of sub-section (1) would be deemed to have concealed the particulars of income or furnished inaccurate particulars of income. In other words, if any money, bullion, jewellery or valuable showing income in the hands of the assessee, and such income was not from explained source, then after search in response to the notice under section 153A, if the assessee has admitted that income, then deeming fiction for concealment of income would attract. The question before us is that no money, bullion, jewellery or book entry was found at the time of search. The only evidence against the assessee is that an admission ofadditional income was made in the statement under section 132(4). The question is this admission akin to disclosure of money, bullion, jewellery or diary and income disclosed representing this statement is to be considered as concealed income ? This aspect has been cons ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
