CIT Vs. AMARDEEP SINGH DHANJAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Court: This appeal is directed against a judgment and order dated 27th May, 2009 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata Bench upholding the decision of Commissioner (Appeal) that the Assessees are entitled to the benefit of immunity arising out of Explanation -5 to section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act and the penalty levied by the Assessment Officer was unjustified. Aggrieved by the judgment and order of the Tribunal, the Revenue has come up in appeal.

(2.) MR . Sinha, learned Advocate appearing in support of the appeal submitted that the Assessee would not have disclosed the income, had the search not taken place. Therefore, the fact that the Assessee has sought to defraud the Revenue is self evident, and therefore, the decision holding that the Assessee is immune from penal provision is altogether bad.

(3.) MR . Poddar, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the Assessee respondent submitted that under Section 271 of the Income Tax Act penalty can be imposed provided the Assessee does not come within the exception clause beginning with the word Unless in Clause (b) of Explanation -5. He drew our attention to the last clause in Explanation -5 which reads as follows: