Utt. HC: Conditional Liberty Must Override Statutory Embargo Under NDPS Act  ||  Utt. HC: While Exercising Inherent Jurisdiction, HC Does Not Function As Court of Appeal or Revision  ||  Pat. HC: Alcohol Consumption Cannot be Conclusively Proved Through Breath Analyzer Report  ||  Ker. HC: Emp. Messaging in Pvt. Whatsapp Group About Safety of Company Doesn’t Attract Disc. Proc.  ||  Ker. HC: Circular Issued to Enable Service of Notice, Summons Through E-Post in Trivandrum  ||  Gau. HC: Compensation Denied Over Death of Man Not Proved to be Bonafide Passenger  ||  Madras HC: Public Service is Being Performed by Lawyers, They Cannot be Denied Funds  ||  Gau. HC: Compensation Awarded to Wife of Deceased Driver Enhanced  ||  Bom. HC: Bar Council of Mah. & Goa Directed to Take Action Against Lawyer Who Appeared Without Band  ||  Delhi High Court: Bail Granted to Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal in Liquor Policy Scam Case    

Sh. Padam Singhee, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi - (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) (16 May 2023)

Penalty under Section 271AAA of IT Act cannot be imposed on the basis of surrendered amount

MANU/ID/0763/2023

Direct Taxation

Present appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order of CIT(A)-XXXI arising out of an appeal before it against the order passed under Section 271AAA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (IT Act) by the DCIT (AO). Issue raised in present case is whether the AO and Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred by levying penalty on the Appellant.

Admittedly, the surrendered income 4.27 crores was offered in the return of the relevant year and tax has been paid thereon. Further, before Learned CIT(A), it was established that no statement under Section 132(4) of the Act was recorded and the correspondence between the assessee and the department also had no inquiry about the manner in which the surrendered income has been derived. Delhi High Court in case of Bhagirath Aggarwal v. CIT has held that, "if an assessee voluntarily makes a surrender, the officials of the income tax department are bound to record that statement under Section 132(4) and such a statement, voluntarily made, is relevant and admissible and is liable to be used as evidence". Thus, where no statement under Section 132(2) of the Act is recorded or specific query is made during assessment, for the purpose of Section 271AAA of the Act, then no inference can be drawn that assessee failed to specify the manner in which such income has been derived or substantiates the manner in which the undisclosed income was derived, so as to levy the penalty.

At the same time, the order of a Co-ordinate Bench at Delhi in Rajendra Aggarwal vs. BCIT ITA is also relevant where it is held that, the initiation of penalty under Section 271AAA cannot be on the basis of surrendered amount which cannot be termed as undisclosed income for the purpose of Section 271AAA of the Act. The appeal of assessee is allowed.

Tags : PENALTY   LEVY   LEGALITY  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2024 - All Rights Reserved