Dismissing the appeal, that the Tribunal stated that the appeal filed by the assessee was allowed and the appeal filed by the Department was dismissed. However, this was incorrect because the order had to be read as a whole particularly paragraphs 6 and 7 of the order. It was clear that the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the assessee was liable to penalty under section 271(1)(c) . After holding that the assessee was liable to penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act, the Tribunal had proceeded to consider the question whether the Commissioner (Appeals) was justified in giving a direction to the Assessing Officer to levy penalty under section 271AAA of the Act. After considering the effect of the provision, the Tribunal held that the Commissioner (Appeals) did not have the power to give a direction to the Assessing Officer to levy penalty under section 271AAA of the Act on the undisclosed income and accordingly set aside that direction. Therefore, the appeal filed by the assessee stood allowed only to that extent and did not amount to deletion of the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer under section 271(1)(c) of the Act by order dated June 27, 2011. Hence, the Tribunal had rightly observed that when the Tribunal held that the penalty could not be levied under section 271AAA of the Act, it was automatic that the levy of penalty made under section 271(1)(c) of the Act was confirmed. The Tribunal further observed that the assessee had not challenged the levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) .( AY.2008-09)