Sumangal Gems v. Dy.CIT (2020) 84 ITR 40 (Jaipur)(Trib.)

S. 271AAB : Penalty-Search initiated on or after Ist day of July 2012-Surrendering additional income-Appeal not filed-Levy of penalty at 10% is held to be justified-Difference in valuation as per books and Department valuer-Levy of penalty is not justified. [S. 132, 153B(1)(b)]

Tribunal held that  once the assessee had surrendered the amount during the course of search, there was no basis to state that there was no undisclosed income. The Assessing Officer made the assessee aware of the charge against it and the assessee was granted an opportunity to refute charge and file its explanations and submissions. Therefore, the assessee was liable for penalty under section 271AAB(1)(a) at 10 per cent. on the undisclosed income. There was no infirmity in the initiation of penalty proceedings and consequent penalty order passed by the Assessing Officer. As regards difference in valuation of stock the  levy of penalty is held to be not justified. (AY. 2015-16)