SURESH NAGRE,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CC-35, MUMBAI

to 2008-09. Since the penalty arises out of identical facts, the appeals are being disposed-off by way of this consolidated order for the sake of convenience and brevity. AY 2007-08 2.1 The penalty for this year stem from assessment framed by Ld. AO u/s 153A pursuant to search carried out by the revenue on 11/04/2007 in the case of ETCO group of cases. The returned income u/s 153A filed by the assessee at Rs.20.19 Lacs was assessed at Rs.104.86 Lacs, after certain additions. Upon further appeal, learned first appellate authority provided certain relief to the assessee. The revenue’s appeal against the same has already been dismissed by the Tribunal vide ITA No. 6590/Mum/2011 order dated 17/03/2017. 2.2 In the meantime, penalty proceedings were initiated against the assessee and the assessee has been saddled with penalty of Rs.7.97 Lacs vide order dated 29/11/2011, after considering the quantum appellate order passed by Ld. CIT(A). The penalty has been levied on account of addition of Rs.1.79 Lacs being cash deposited in the bank account and another addition of Rs.21.90 Lacs representing undisclosed income. The same, upon confirmation by learned first appellate authority, is under challenge before us. 2.2 Upon hearing, it transpires that out of addition of Rs.21.90 Lacs, an amount of Rs.18 Lacs has already been deleted by Ld. CIT(A) since the same has been held to be already offered in the return of income. The stand of learned first appellate authority has already been confirmed by the Tribunal by way of dismissal of revenue’s appeal. Therefore, we direct Ld. AO to delete the penalty to the extent of addition of Rs.18 Lacs. The balance penalty stands confirmed. The appeal stands partly allowed. AYs 2005-06 & 2006-07 2.3 In these two years, the assessee has been levied penalty against addition made on account of cash deposit in the bank account. The amount of addition for AY 2005-06 is Rs.75,000/-& Rs.71,500/- for AY 2006-07 against which penalty of Rs.25,245/- & Rs.24,067/- respectively has been levied. The respective income was not offered in the return of income and the additions have already attained finality. The assessee did not contest the quantum before learned first appellate authority. Therefore, finding no infirmity in the impugned order, these two appeals stand dismissed. ITA No. 3979/Mum/2018, AY 2008-09 2.4 In this year, the penalty has been levied for addition of Rs.78,900/- towards undisclosed income and addition of Rs.1,26,000/- on account of notional rental income from certain house property which has remained vacant during the year. Since the amount of Rs.78,900/- has already been disclosed in the return of income and another addition merely represent notional rental income against vacant house property, we are inclined to delete the impugned penalty. This appeal stands allowed. Conclusion 3. stand partly allowed. ITA Nos. 3977- 78/Mum/2018 stands dismissed. ITA No. 3979/Mum/2018 stands allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 23rd August, 2019.