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 (12) TMI 1060

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... eration. The impugned concealed or undisclosed rental income was detected on account of search proceedings and the same has been accepted by the assessee qua the assessment order. The penalty order which follows the quantum addition therefore is a natural corollary. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for under statement of income - period of limitation - Penalty order has been hit by limitation prescribed in section 275(1)(a) and cannot survive. Accordingly, the penalty order u/s 271(1)(c) dated 25.10.2021 for AY-2013-14 and AY 2014-15 qua addition in respect of under statement of income is quashed. The order of lower authorities on the issue set aside and the Ld. AO is directed to recompute the quantum of penalty payable by the assessee after removing .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ITA No.2030 and 2031, the assessee had contested that the impugned penalty order dated 25.10.2021 is partly time barred qua the understatement of the income in respect of amounts of Rs. 49,51,362/- and Rs. 1,87,75,583/- respectively. Accordingly the need for additional ground is incomprehensible. Be that as it may be, we proceed to adjudicate this appeal after admitting the impugned additional grounds. 3.0 All the three appeals raised by the appellant are having identical issues both on the legal issue raised by the appellant by additional ground as well as on the merits of the case and hence adjudicated altogether. ITA No. 2029/Chny/2024 for AY 2012-13 4.0 The only issue raised by the assessee vide its grounds of appeal no.(a) to (e) and .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sed by 31.03.2020. However, as the order was passed on 25.10.2021, the penalty has become time barred. The Ld. DR argued that the assessee cannot challenge the penalty order as the quantum addition has been admitted by it and that once concealed income is finally determined, penalty is automatically to be levied. It was argued that the rental income was discerned by the department on account of search proceedings and therefore penalty was attracted. On the issue of limitation matter, the Ld. DR submitted that revenue s case is protected by TOLA guidelines effective from 23.03.2020 to 31.03.2022 and thus penalty proceedings would not fall in the mischief of limitation statute. 6.0 We find sufficient force in the argument of Ld. DR regarding .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... als are concerned, it is noted that facts of the case as in ITA No.2029/Chny/2024 for AY 2012-13 above are identical except for change in figures. The arguments of the both the sides are identical. Accordingly, the decision taken in ITA No.2029 would apply mutatis mutandis. Accordingly the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee qua challenge to penalty u/s 271(1)(c) vide ITA No.2030 and 2031 above, for undisclosed rental income are dismissed. 8.0 Through the above appeals the appellant has also contested through ground of appeal regarding the legality of penalty proceedings in respect of under stated income which was confirmed by the appellate authorities, submitting that the penalty order u/s 271(1)(c) dated 25.10.2021 is barred by limit .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ) and the department gets time to complete the same within one year from the end of the financial year in which order of the CIT(A) is received by the CIT/Pr.CIT/CCIT/Pr.CCIT. It has been argued by the Ld. DR that the TOLA guidelines would be helping the department in respect of this issue also. 8.2 We have heard the rival submissions in the light of material available on records. We have noted that the arguments put forth by the Ld. DR are not based upon correct understanding and appreciation of the facts of the case. It is an undisputed facts on record that the addition of Rs. 49,51,362/- and Rs. 1,87,75,583/- for AY-2013-14 and AY 2014-15 respectively on account of under statement of income was confirmed by this Hon ble tribunal vide its .....

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