SURESH BANSAL,FARIDABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- II, FARIDABAD
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal deleted the penalty imposed on the unexplained jewellery addition as it was fully deleted by the Tribunal in the assessee's appeal. However, the penalty on the unexplained cash addition was upheld due to the assessee's failure to provide a satisfactory explanation.
What were the facts?
A search and seizure operation was conducted on the assessee, leading to additions for unexplained jewellery and cash. The Commissioner (Appeals) deleted part of the jewellery addition, and the Assessing Officer imposed penalty under Section 271AAA on the sustained additions.
What were the issues?
Whether penalty under Section 271AAA is leviable on additions that were subsequently deleted by a higher appellate authority, and whether the assessee provided sufficient explanation for unexplained cash found during a search.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘G’ NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY & DR. B.R.R. KUMAR
This is an appeal by the assessee against order dated 13.07.2018 of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) confirming the penalty imposed under section 271AAA of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’), pertaining to assessment year 2013-14.
Briefly the facts are, the assessee is a resident individual. A search and seizure operation was carried out in case of the assessee. Pursuant to the search and seizure operation, assessment proceeding was initiated and while completing the assessment, the Assessing Officer made additions of Rs.10,14,418/- on account of unexplained jewellery and Rs.50,000/- on account of explained cash found in the course of search and seizure operation. Based on the additions so made, the Assessing Officer initiated proceeding for imposition of penalty under section 271AAA of the Act. In course of penalty proceeding, the Assessing Officer noticed that learned Commissioner (Appeals) has deleted a part of the addition made on account of unexplained jewellery. Thus, ultimately he passed an order under section 271AAA of the Act on the additions sustained by learned Commissioner (Appeals) and imposed penalty of Rs.87,942/- The penalty so imposed was also upheld by learned Commissioner (Appeals).
We have considered rival submissions and perused the materials on record. Undisputedly, the Assessing Officer has imposed penalty under section 271AAA of the Act at 10% of the undisclosed income, comprising of Rs.8,29,718/- as unexplained jewellery and Rs.50,000/- as unexplained cash. It is a fact on record that the addition made on account of unexplained jewellery was fully deleted by the Tribunal in assessee’s appeal. However, the addition made towards unexplained cash was upheld, as, the assessee could not explain the source of such cash found during search. Keeping in view the aforesaid factual position, penalty imposed under section 271AAA of the Act in respect of unexplained jewellery, amounting to Rs.8,29,418/- deserves to be deleted and accordingly, we do so. However, insofar as, the addition made of Rs.50,000/- on account of unexplained cash, we find, at no stage the assessee has offered any substantive explanation or supporting evidence to explain the source of such cash. That being the case, penalty imposed on the addition made on account of unexplained cash of Rs.50,000/- is upheld.
In the result, the appeal is partly allowed, as indicate above.
Order pronounced in the open court on 16th March, 2022
More judgments on Section 271AAA
- Rosy Blue (India) Private Limited, Mumbai vs Dy. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central…ITA 3351/MUM/2026[2012-13]Status: Disposed17 Sept 2026AY 2012-13
- B Nanji Enterprises Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The ACIT, Circle-1(1)(1), AhmedabadITA 2401/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed5 Aug 2026AY 2018-19
- B Nanji Enterprises Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The ACIT, Circle-1(1)(1), AhmedabadITA 2400/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed5 Aug 2026AY 2017-18
- B Nanji Enterprises Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The ACIT, Circle-1(1)(1), AhmedabadITA 2399/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: Disposed5 Aug 2026AY 2016-17
- B Nanji Enterprises Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The ACIT, Circle-1(1)(1), AhmedabadITA 2398/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: Disposed5 Aug 2026AY 2016-17
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Santosh Das And Anr. vs. Union Of INDIACalcutta · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S Rama Krishna Industries vs. State Of Hp And OthersHimachal Pradesh · 30 Oct 2026
- Smt Usha W/O Shri Tarun vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Maruti Nandan Minetech Private Limited vs. The Joint CommissionerRajasthan · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Rentex Polymers Private Limited vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Central Goods And Services TaxDelhi · 29 Oct 2026