ITAT held that assessee had concealed income and penalty was justified
ITAT held that assessee had concealed income and penalty was justified
After assessment was completed, AO noticed deposits in assessee’s bank account and sought to know source. Assessee stated they were refund for booking a flat, and Rs. 5,38,854 was interest returned. Assessee offered it to tax. AO added the sum. AO levied penalty for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. CIT(A) directed penalty at Rs 1,25,306 instead of Rs 1,45,906. ITAT held that assessee had concealed income and penalty was justified.-500624
1. The assessment was completed u/s 143(3) at a total income of Rs. 7,38,850 against the returned income of Rs. 2,00,000.
2. While examining the bank statement AO noticed deposits of Rs. 4,84,969 and Rs 18,24,975 and asked assessee to furnish source of the deposits.
3. Assessee stated that the deposits were refund of amount for booking a flat.
4. The deposits were the amounts refunded by BPTP Ltd., Rs. 18,24,975 against the principal amount and Rs. 5,38,854 against the interest on it.
5. Assessee offered this amount for taxation.
6. Accordingly, Rs 5,38,854 was added back to assessee’s total income.
7. AO initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income, and levied penalty of Rs. 1,45,906.
8. CIT(A) directed that the penalty should be Rs. 1,25,306/- instead of Rs. 1,45,906.
On appeal, the ITAT held as under:
9. It is evident that the assessee had received the amount of Rs. 5,38,854/-, which should have been made the assessee curious about this entry in his bank account.
10. Therefore, it is clear that this amount had not been truly disclosed and explained by the assessee at the time of filing of its return of income, therefore, this amount of Rs. 5,38,854/- was treated as concealed income.
11. Therefore, the AO was fully justified in imposing the penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 and Ld. CIT(A) was also right in reducing the amount of TDS and rightly confirmed the penalty of Rs. 1,25,306 instead of Rs. 1,45,906.
Case Reference - RAHUL SYA vs. ITO
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH "SMC-2": NEW DELHI
BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER
ITA No. 4995/Del/2015
(A.Y. : 2010-11)
