[aaykarbhavan] Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) – Search u/s 132(4) - when the statement is being recorded by the authorized officer it is incumbent upon the authorized officer to explain the provisions of Explanation 5 in its entirety to the assessee concerned - HC

 GUJARAT HIGH COURT - Income Tax

Commissioner of Income Tax-I Versus Niraj Kumbhat

Deletion of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act – Search u/s 132(4) of the Act - Undisclosed income – Held that:- Revenue contended that the assessee has not specified in its statement, the manner in which such income has been derived – the objection of the Revenue is baseless as it has been observed by the CIT (A) that it has been specifically mentioned the manner, in which the undisclosed income has been derived – Relying upon Commissioner of Income Tax v. Mahendra C. Shah  GUJARAT HIGH COURT] - when the statement is being recorded by the authorized officer it is incumbent upon the authorized officer to explain the provisions of Explanation 5 in its entirety to the assessee concerned and the authorized officer cannot stop short at a particular stage so as to permit the Revenue to take advantage of such a lapse in the statement - thus, there is no infirmity in the order is upheld – Decided against Revenue.

Regards

Prarthana Jalan

__._,_.___

receive alert on mobile, subscribe to SMS Channel named "aaykarbhavan"
[COST FREE]
SEND "on aaykarbhavan" TO 9870807070 FROM YOUR MOBILE.

To receive the mails from this group send message to aaykarbhavan-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

Visit Your Group

• New Members 3

• Privacy • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use