9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (8) TMI 1235X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... None. ORAL JUDGMENT PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V. ANJARIA The above captioned appeals preferred by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 arises out of the common order dated 29th October, 2010 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Rajkot Bench, Rajkot passed in ITA No. 173, 174 and 175 of 2009 in respect of Assessment Years 1992-1993, 1993-1994 and 1994-1995 respectively. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s on 23/24.06.1994, it was revealed that several bank accounts, FDRs, IVPs etc. were maintained by the appellant and one Swami Keshvanand. The assessment under sec. 143(3) read with sec. 147 of the Act was completed and the additions were made on account of FDRs bank accounts etc. 3.1 The above income was added in the hands of Swami Keshavanand on substantive basis, whereas against the respondent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s etc. is assessed on protective basis in the hands of the appellant and interest on these investments is also assessed on protective basis in the hands of the appellant. In para-7 of the order in all the above assessment years, the AO has also recorded that the demand on addition of Rs. 19,43,000/-, Rs. 4,38,000/- and Rs. 57,90,974 in the above assessment years respectively will remain protective ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppeal came to be dismissed as per the impugned common order. The Tribunal recorded the following findings : .......The substantive additions are in the hands of Swami Keshavanand. In that case also penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act has been levied for assessment years, 1992-1993, 1993-1994, 1994- 1995, 1996-1997, 1997-1998 and 1998-1999 and the ITAT vide ITA No. 140 to 145/Rjt/2009 order of even da ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... de against the respondent-assessee, is proper. It cannot be gainsaid that when the additions were made by the Assessing Officer only on protective basis, the ingredient necessary for imposition of penalty under section 271 (1)(c) of the Act, namely, that there was a willful concealment of income, was absent. In respect of an addition made on protective basis, a mens rea cannot be attributed to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
