9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (12) TMI 1217X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r material placed before us, the Grounds of Appeal raised by the assessee are also general in nature. In the absence of any material, we have no hesitation in confirming the concurrent findings of the Lower Authorities and thereby confirming the levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. Appeal filed by the Assessee is dismissed. - ITA No. 493/Ahd/2017 - - - Dated:- 14-12-2022 - Shri Waseem Ahmed , Accountant Member And Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar , Judicial Member Appellant by : None Respondent by : Shri Rakesh Jha , Sr. D. R. ORDER Per T. R. Senthil Kumar , Judicial Member This is an appeal filed by the Assessee as against the order dated 29.12.2016 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Ah ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t is drawn from the order of the Tribunals in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Multi Plan India (P) Ltd.; 38 ITD 320 (Del) and Estate of Late Tukojirao Holka vs. CWT: 223 ITR 480 (M.P.). 3. Before parting, it is appropriate to add that in case the assessee is able to show that there was a reasonable cause for non-representation on the date of hearing, it would be at liberty if so advised to pray for a recall of this order. 3.1. The Ld. D.R. further submitted that the assessee has not filed any Miscellaneous Application to restore the appeal within six months as provided under section 254(2) of the Act. The findings of the Ld. CIT(A) even on merits also confirmed the levy of penalty of Rs. 7,82,830/-. Thus the Ld. D.R. pleaded the abo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tarted submitting certain explanations. The appellate authority has given benefit of doubt during quantum proceedings but certain unaccounted transactions could not be held as explainable. Therefore, the explanation so submitted has no corroborative value with whatever submitted through return of income. The appellant has relied on a few cases but ratio in those cases is not applicable. This is not inadvertent mistake or a silly mistake. The appellant in this case has not come out clearly with important facts till the filing return of income so as to show the lack of mens rea. I feel the mistake claimed by appellant is intentional and undertaken with purpose by not disclosing true income in the return of income. It may be mentioned tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re is specific finding by the A.O. In a recent judgment dated 31.10.2013 in the case of Mak Data Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT, 38 Taxmann.Com 448 (SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court has ruled, voluntary disclosure does not absolve assessee, bonafide explanation of income required . The facts of the case also make it amenable to the judgment against it in the case of K.P. Madhusudhanan Vs. CIT 251 ITR 99 (SC). Further, as per judgments, additional income in response to notice u/s. 148, penalty on additional income confirmed in the case laws PC Joseph Bros. Vs. CIT 243 ITR 818 (Ker.) Narain Das Suraj Bhan Vs. CST 21 STC 104 (SC) The dictionary meaning of the word concealment is to hide, to keep secret. The Explanation to section 271(1) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
