On appeal to the Tribunal held that in the assessment order, the entire undisclosed investment was considered as income in the hands of the Assessee which was also accepted by the Assessee. It is admitted that other two persons did not make any payment towards purchase of the immovable property. Hence, the Tribunal held that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming only 1/3^rd of the penalty amount instead of the entire penalty amount levied by the Ld. AO. Accordingly, the matter was remitted to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh consideration. (AY. 2008-09)