9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (8) TMI 747X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e fact that the assessee voluntarily offered the income, declared in the survey, in the return of income and the assessment was made without making any addition on that score, we hold that such an income cannot constitute the bedrock for the imposition of penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act. We, therefore, affirm the impugned order. Revenue Appeal is dismissed. - ITA No. 1645/PUN/2018 - - - Dated:- 16-8-2022 - Shri R.S. Syal, Vice President And Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Judicial Member For the Assessee : Shri Kishor Phadke For the Revenue : Shri Arvind Desai ORDER PER R.S. SYAL, VP : This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order passed by the CIT(A)-8, Pune on 12-07-2018 deleting the penalty of Rs. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4. Explanation 1 to section 271(1) provides that where in respect of any facts material to the computation of total income, the assessee fails to offer an explanation or offers explanation which is found by the AO etc. to be false or he is unable to substantiate, then the amount added or disallowed in computing total income of such person as a result thereof shall, for the purposes of clause (c) of this sub-section, be deemed to represent the income in respect of which particulars have been concealed . On going through the mandate of the Explanation, it becomes overt that the penalty is leviable in respect of the amount of income added or disallowed in the computation of total income . A particular income can be added only when it is n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .40.74 lakh. The AO accordingly completed the assessment by making this addition and thereafter imposed penalty. It was in that backdrop of the facts that the Hon ble Supreme Court held that the penalty u/s.271(1)(c) was rightly imposed because the disclosure of the assessee was immaterial. The Hon ble Supreme Court observed that Explanation to section 271(1) raises a presumption of concealment, when difference is noted by the AO, between reported and assessed income . It was in this factual scenario where the income reported by the assessee in the return of income was lower than the income finally assessed by the AO, that the Hon ble Supreme Court held that the penalty was rightly leviable. 6. Turning to the facts of the extant case, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
