SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

G.C.GUPTA, CHANDRA POOJARI
T. Prashanth Reddy – Appellant
Versus
Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle 4(1), Hyderabad – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.V. Raghuram,Amlan Tripathy

ORDER

Chandra Poojari, Accountant Member. - These three appeals preferred by the assessee are directed against the different orders passed by the CIT(A)-V, Hyderabad and pertains to assessment years 2004-05, 2005-06 & 2006-07 with regard to levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act.

2. Brief facts of the issue are that the assessee is an individual and filed its return of income originally as follows:

Assessment years
Date of filing
Amount of income
Declared
1. 2004-05
28-9-04
Rs. 5,70,950
2. 2005-06
27-9-05
Rs. 7,91,562
Rs. 1,95,000 (Agri Income)
3. 2006-07
21-7-06
Rs. 13,37,415
Rs. 2,36,500 (Agri Income)

3. There was a survey conducted under section 133A of the Act in the premises of the assessee on 15-11-2006 and one undisclosed bank account found wherein certain deposits has been made which had escaped from assessment:

The total cash deposits on various dates during the period from :

1.
16-2-04 to 31-3-04
Rs. 31,24,326
Peak cash deposit
Rs. 18 lakhs on 27-2-04
2.
1-4-04 to 31-3-2005
Rs. 1,24,35,740
With peak cash deposit
Rs. 9 lakhs on 4-2-05
3.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top