Meena Bajaj (Smt.) v. ITO (2018) 167 DTR 89 / 192 TTJ 952 / 63 ITR 35 (SN) (Jaipur)(Trib.)

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-concealment–Surrender of amount–cash credits–Survey-Surrender was held to be not voluntary-Levy of penalty is held to be justified. [S. 131, 133A]

Dismissing the appeal of the assessee the Tribunal held that; survey was conducted more than 10 months before assessee filed its return of income. If the intention was to make full and true disclosure the asseeee would have filed return declaring income inclusive of amount which was surrendered later during course of assessment proceedings. Tribunal held that, it was clear that assessee had no intention to declare its true income. It was statutory duty of assessee to record all its transactions in books of account, to explain source of payments made by it and to declare its true income in return of income filed by it from year to year. Accordingly the levy of penalty is held to be justified. (AY. 2005 -06)