{"id":1832,"date":"2018-07-23T09:34:06","date_gmt":"2018-07-23T09:34:06","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/dcit-v-subhas-chandra-agarwala-and-sons-huf-2018-65-itr-18-snkol-trib\/"},"modified":"2018-07-23T10:22:44","modified_gmt":"2018-07-23T10:22:44","slug":"dcit-v-subhas-chandra-agarwala-and-sons-huf-2018-65-itr-18-snkol-trib","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/dcit-v-subhas-chandra-agarwala-and-sons-huf-2018-65-itr-18-snkol-trib\/","title":{"rendered":"DCIT  v. Subhas Chandra Agarwala and Sons (HUF) (2018) 65 ITR  18 (SN)(Kol) (Trib)"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Dismissing the appeal of the revenue the Tribunal held that ; the AO \u00a0having accepted the statement of total income and the return showing the income from commodities under the head \u201cIncome from other sources\u201d could not now after a perusal of the income and expenditure account determine the character of transaction in the penalty proceedings as income from business or profession. The assessee an individual who was a salaried person engaged in the previous year relevant to the assessment year for the first time in an activity from which he derived income from other sources was not required to maintain books of account. Since the income of Rs. 2 crores was in fact entered in the other documents maintained in the normal course relating to the assessment year 2013-14, which document was retrieved during search, the amount of Rs. 3 crores offered by the assessee did not fall in the ken of \u201cundisclosed income\u201d defined in section\u00a0271AAB\u00a0. Since Rs. 2 crores could not be termed as \u201cundisclosed income\u201d in terms of S.\u00a0271AAB\u00a0, no penalty could be levied against the assessee.(AY.2013-14)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>S. 271AAB:Penalty -Search initiated on or after Ist day of July  2012- Amount offered was not undisclosed income -Levy of penalty was held to be not justified .[ S.132 ]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1832","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-digest"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-ty","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1832","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1832"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1832\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1838,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1832\/revisions\/1838"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1832"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1832"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1832"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}