During a search and seizure operation conducted at the business and residential premises of the assessee under section\u00a0132(1), the assessee surrendered additional income in the statement under section\u00a0132(4)\u00a0and declared in the return filed for the assessment year 2010-11. The surrendered income included the amount on account of excess stock and an amount as income from other sources. The assessee could not explain certain seized documents but stated that those could be included to form part of the amounts surrendered during the search and seizure operation and paid the tax with interest on the surrendered income. The Assessing Officer levied penalty under section\u00a0271AAA. The Commissioner (Appeals) deleted the penalty on the ground that if no specific question was put under section\u00a0132(4), it could not be concluded that the assessee had failed to reply or specifically substantiate the manner of concealment. On appeal by the Department, the Tribunal held that the assessee had failed to satisfy the conditions laid down in section\u00a0271AAA(2)\u00a0to get the general amnesty under section\u00a0271AAA(2)\u00a0since the assessee had neither specified nor substantiate the manner in which the undisclosed income was derived and accordingly confirmed the penalty. On appeal\u00a0 dismissing the appeal, that the assessee had failed to discharge the obligation under section\u00a0271AAA(2)\u00a0of specification of the manner in which the undisclosed income had been derived and thereafter substantiate such disclosures. The imposition of penalty is dependent not merely on the disclosure of income having been made in the course of statement recorded under section\u00a0132(4). The order of the Tribunal confirming levy of penalty under section\u00a0271AAA\u00a0is\u00a0 not erroneous. (AY. 2010-11)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
S. 271AAA : Penalty-Search initiated on or after 1st June, 2007-Manner of deriving surrendered income-Failure to satisfy conditions-Order of Tribunal confirming levy of penalty is not erroneous. [S. 132(4), 260A] <\/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":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-48634","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-cEq","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/48634","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=48634"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/48634\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":48635,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/48634\/revisions\/48635"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=48634"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=48634"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=48634"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}