Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2024 (2) TMI 1111

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... SLP against the same decision was dismissed in Prasanna Dugar [ 2015 (8) TMI 477 - SC ORDER] holding that even if assessee voluntarily disclosed a sum subsequent to search and offered said sum to tax, penalty levied under sec. 271(1)(c) r.w. Explanation 5A was justified. Reverting to the present fact situation, it is evident that due to search action, it was disclosed that there had been suppression of receipts by the assessee. This suppression of receipts was also later on admitted by the assessee vide his statement u/sec.132(4). The suppress receipts were even disclosed as additional income in the return filed u/sec. 153A of the Act by the assessee. But the fact remains that if search had not taken place, then these suppressed .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ot respond to any of the notices nor provided any compliance for hearing. That, even before this Tribunal, this is the 4th opportunity of hearing given to the assessee, but still on this day of hearing, assessee has not appeared nor has filed any written submissions. Therefore, the evasive nature of the assessee is absolutely clear and that he is taking the process of law in a very casual manner, thereby, delaying the outcome of justice. We, therefore, find no infirmity with the findings of the ld. CIT(A) in these matters for dismissing the appeals of the assessee for non-prosecution since mere filing of the appeal is not sufficient, but the assessee who has filed appeal, should be vigilant and should take his case to a logical end. That, w .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tarily disclosed a sum subsequent to search and offered said sum to tax, penalty levied under sec. 271(1)(c) r.w. Explanation 5A was justified. 5. Reverting to the present fact situation, it is evident that due to search action, it was disclosed that there had been suppression of receipts by the assessee. This suppression of receipts was also later on admitted by the assessee vide his statement u/sec. 132(4) of the Act. The suppress receipts were even disclosed as additional income in the return filed u/sec. 153A of the Act by the assessee. But the fact remains that if search had not taken place, then these suppressed receipts would not have been discovered and would have escaped being taxed. This is a definite case of concealment of inc .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates