Mak Data Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

358 ITR 593Supreme Court of India2013#159 most cited

What is Mak Data Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Once the Assessing Officer records satisfaction regarding concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income, the onus shifts to the assessee, and if not discharged, penalty under Section 271(1)(c) can be levied without requiring separate detailed satisfaction.

443

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2014 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Mak Data Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT · 358 ITR 593 · Section 271(1)(c) penalty · concealment of income · furnishing inaccurate particulars · onus framework · AO satisfaction · levy of penalty · Income Tax Act 1961

Sections most often in play

Section 271(1)(c)Section 143(3)Section 139(1)Section 147Section 1961Section 132Section 148Section 153A
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 271aabsection 271aafurnishing inaccurate particulars of incomefurnishing inaccurate particularspenalty u/s 271(1)(c)penalty under section 271(1)(c)section 271asection 274concealment of incomelevy of penaltysection 271(1)section 271(1)(c)

Judgments citing Mak Data Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

Quantum Coders Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5766/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Jm Ita No. 5766/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year: 2011-12 Quantum Coders Ltd., Vs Income Tax Officer, 501-502, Plot No. 1, Dda Ward-14(4), Building, Distt. Centre, Janak New Delhi Puri, New Delhi-110058 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacq1197M Assessee By : Ms. Devina Sharma, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Kaushlendra Tiwari, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 30.05.2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.06.2018 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 05.08.2015 Of Ld. Cit(A)-7, New Delhi.

For Appellant: Ms. Devina Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Kaushlendra Tiwari, Sr. DR
Section 10ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…ly supported the orders of the authorities below and relied on the following case laws: " Union of India Vs Dharamendra Textile Processors (2007) 295 ITR 244 (SC) " CIT Vs Zoom Communication (P.) Ltd. (2010) 327 ITR 510 (Del.) " MAK Data P. Ltd. Vs CIT (2013) 358 ITR 593 (SC) " CIT Vs Gates Foam & Rubber Co. 91 ITR 467 (Ker.) " CIT Vs India Seafood 105 ITR 708 (Ker.) " Steel Ingots Ltd. Vs CIT 296 ITR 228 (MP) " CIT Vs Escorts Finance Ltd. (2010) 328 ITR 44 (Del.) " K.P. Madhusudhanan Vs CIT (2001) 251 ITR 99 (SC) 8. We have considered the submissions of both the parties and carefully gone through the material av…

Suresh Jindal, Karnal vs. ITO, Karnal

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1664/DEL/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jun 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri N.K. Billaiyaassessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. K. Tewari, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…le Delhi High Court held that citing of past instance or lack of absence of cross-examination, cannot vitiate the initiation and culmination of penalty proceedings in case of accommodation entry. 3. MAK Data P. Ltd vs. CIT [38 taxmann.com 448 (SC)/[2013] 358 ITR 593 (SC)/[2013] 263 CTR 1] Where Hon'ble Supreme Court held that Under Explanation 1 to s. 271(1)(c), voluntary disclosure of concealed income does not absolve assessee of s. 271(1)(c) penalty if the assessee fails to offer an explanation which is bona fide and proves that all the material facts have been disclosed. "9. We are of the view that t…

ITO 3(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Rak Construciton Project P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1247/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Pawan Singhito-3(3)(1), M/S Rak Construction Project Pvt. Mumbai. Ltd. 113-A, Mittal Tower, Vs. Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. Pan: Aacck8147P Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Ram Tiwari (DR)For Respondent: Shri Bhupendra Shah (AR)
Section 143(3)Section 253Section 254(1)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITO-3(3)(1), M/s Rak Construction Project Pvt. Mumbai. Ltd. 113-A, Mittal Tower, Vs. Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. PAN: AACCK8147P Appellant Respondent Appellant by : Shri Ram Tiwari (DR) Respondent by : Shri Bhupendra Shah (AR) Date of Hearing : 28.06.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 28.06.2018 ORDER UNDER SECTION 254(1)OF INCOME TAX ACT PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER; 1. This appeal by Revenue under section 253 of the Act is directed against the order of ld. Commissioner…

Sh. Archit Aggarwal, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 4441/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jun 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. R. K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2010-11 Archit Aggarwal Dcit 21/17, East Punjabi, Bagh Vs Circle 26 (1) Room No. 192 New Delhi – 110026 C. R. Building, I. P. Estate Pan No. Ahnpa3720B New Delhi – 110002 (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 271

…e that such explanation is bonafide and that all the facts relating to the same and material to the computation of his total income have been disclosed by him. Relying on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Mak Data Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT reported 358 ITR 593 and the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Zoom Communications Pvt. Ltd. reported 327 ITR 510 he sustained the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer u/s. 271 (1) ( c ) of the IT Act, 1961. 7. Aggrieved with such order of the CIT (A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 8. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee str…

Ramesh Chand Bansal, Beawar vs. DCIT, Ajmer

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 398/JPR/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 Jun 2018AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Seema Meena, JCIT - DR
Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 139Section 153ASection 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…was guilty of either concealing particulars of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. The offer to tax of income by the assessee has just been accepted.------------ 7. ------------- Therefore even the Hon’ble supreme court’s decision [Mak Data 358 ITR 593] suggests that the satisfaction need not be recorded in a particular manner but from a reading of the assessment order as a whole such satisfaction should be clearly discernible. --------------we have read the order of assessment as a whole and are satisfied that satisfaction for initiation of penalty proceedings is not discernible from the order…

Beta Maschinenfabrik (P) Ltd., Noida vs. DCIT, Circle- 1, Noida

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 87/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jun 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini

For Appellant: Sh. R.R.Maurya, Adv. and Sh. Rajesh Arora, C.AFor Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 132Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…ers of authorities below and relied upon the following decisions: (i) Union of India vs. Dharmendra Textile Processors (2007) 295 ITR 244 in which Hon’ble Supreme Court held that penalty u/s 271(1)(c ) is a civil liability. (ii) MAK Data P.Ltd. vs. CIT (2013) 358 ITR 593 (SC) in which Hon’ble Supreme Court held that under Explanation 1 to S.271(1)(c) voluntary disclosure of concealed income does not absolve assessee of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) if the assessee fails to offer an explanation which is bonafide and proves that all the material facts have been disclosed. Page 4 of 8 ITA 87/Del/2018 A.Y.:2009-10 Beta Masc…

Govardhan G Vanani, Mumbai vs. DCIT (OSD-I) Cen RG 7, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 269/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai15 Jun 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh() & Shri G Manjunatha ()

Section 13(2)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…assessee from the liability of penalty. The appellant's case is on a much stronger footing, as it is a case of failure to include substantial income in the return and there is no explanation for such failure. 13. In the case of MAK DATA vs CIT as reported in 358 ITR 593(SC) 2013, the Hon'ble Supreme Court went one step further and held that even in the cases where the assessee had admitted certain income during the course of search/survey or otherwise, with a view to buy peace or with a view to avoid litigation or with a view to have amicable settlement, still the assessee cannot escape penalty u/s.271(l)(c) of…

Success Developers P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 10, Mumbai

ITA 5608/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R. C. Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 5608/Mum/2015 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri Naresh KumarFor Respondent: Shri M. C. Omi
Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 271A

…y held that ‘with the omission of the expression 'deliberately' mens-rea is no longer a pre-requisite for imposition of penalty.’ We further notice that Ld. CIT(A) has also relied upon judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of MAK Data P. Ltd. vs. CIT, 358 ITR 593 (SC), wherein it has been categorically held that as per Explanation 1 to s. 271(1)(c), voluntary disclosure of concealed income does not absolve assessee of s. 271(1)(c) penalty if the assessee fails to offer an explanation which is bona fide and proves that all the material facts have been disclosed. Apart from above, Ld. CIT(A) had also relied…

Ashok S. Agarwal, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 1227/PUN/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jun 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1227/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri R.G. NaharFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Aggarwal
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…ct and whether the Assessing Officer made any addition thereafter are the issues to be decided. 8. The learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue placed reliance on the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in MAK Data (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT (2013) 358 ITR 593 (SC) and the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in B. Damodar Vaman Baliga Jewellers Vs. JCIT (2013) 353 ITR 206 (Kar). He further referred to the provisions of section 271(1B) of the Act and pointed out that once the penalty proceedings have been initiated, then there is deemed satisfaction in the case. 9. The learned Authorized Representative for…

Shri Suresh Kumar Mittal, L/H Shri Devi Sahai Mittal, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1-2, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 726/JPR/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 May 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Us.

For Appellant: Shri Nikhilesh Kataria (CA)For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl.CIT)
Section 133ASection 271(1)(c)

…e course of assessment proceedings. It was further submitted that the decisions relied upon by the Assessing Officer and the ld. CIT(A) are distinguishable on facts. It was submitted that the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mak Data Pvt. Ltd. 358 ITR 593 (SC) relied upon by the ld. CIT(A) is factually distinguishable as in that case there was a specific surrender based on voluminous documents found during the course of survey and the return was ITA 726/JP/2017_ 4 Suresh Kumar Mittal Vs ITO filed after the survey proceedings which is not the facts in the present case. The ld AR further relied on t…

M/S Kashmir Steel Rolling Mills, Jammu vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Jammu

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 548/ASR/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar09 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 548/(Asr)/2016 Assessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. Tarun Bansal (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (D.R.)
Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

…relevant is not so much the words in which the satisfaction by the AO in the assessment order is couched, if it is otherwise apparent or discernible from his order. This position of law was again confirmed by the Apex Court in Mak Data Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT [2013] 358 ITR 593 (SC), affirming the decision by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court (reported at 352 ITR 1). We reproduce a relevant part thereof as under: (pg. 599): ‘The Assessing Officer has to satisfy whether the penalty proceedings be initiated or not during the course of the assessment proceedings and the Assessing Officer is not required to 5 ITA No. 548 (Asr)/…

M/S Akshay Shakti Shiksha Avam Samaj Kalyan Samiti, Bhopal vs. The ACIT 1(1), Bhopal

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for assessment

ITA 520/IND/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore07 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat, Hon’Ble & Shri Manish Borad, Hon’Bleita Nos. 518 To 520/Ind/2016 A.Ys. 2007-08, 2009-10 & 2010-11

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 271A

…ssessee. 10. We observe that the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) confirmed the impugned penalty by dealing extensively with the facts of the case along with applying the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of MAK Data P. Ltd. vs. CIT; 358 ITR 593 observing as follows :- “4.5(a) I have carefully considered the facts of the case and the written submissions filed by ld. AR. The facts of the case and the date-line in brief are as under :- - The search took placed on 23.07.2009. - No surrender of undisclosed income was made during the course of the search. - After the seizure and analysis…

M/S Akshay Shakti Shiksha Avam Samaj Kalyan Samiti, Bhopal vs. The ACIT 1(1), Bhopal

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for assessment

ITA 519/IND/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore07 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat, Hon’Ble & Shri Manish Borad, Hon’Bleita Nos. 518 To 520/Ind/2016 A.Ys. 2007-08, 2009-10 & 2010-11

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 271A

…ssessee. 10. We observe that the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) confirmed the impugned penalty by dealing extensively with the facts of the case along with applying the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of MAK Data P. Ltd. vs. CIT; 358 ITR 593 observing as follows :- “4.5(a) I have carefully considered the facts of the case and the written submissions filed by ld. AR. The facts of the case and the date-line in brief are as under :- - The search took placed on 23.07.2009. - No surrender of undisclosed income was made during the course of the search. - After the seizure and analysis…

M/S Akshay Shakti Shiksha Avam Samaj Kalyan Samiti, Bhopal vs. The ACIT 1(1), Bhopal

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for assessment

ITA 518/IND/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Indore07 May 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat, Hon’Ble & Shri Manish Borad, Hon’Bleita Nos. 518 To 520/Ind/2016 A.Ys. 2007-08, 2009-10 & 2010-11

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 271A

…ssessee. 10. We observe that the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) confirmed the impugned penalty by dealing extensively with the facts of the case along with applying the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of MAK Data P. Ltd. vs. CIT; 358 ITR 593 observing as follows :- “4.5(a) I have carefully considered the facts of the case and the written submissions filed by ld. AR. The facts of the case and the date-line in brief are as under :- - The search took placed on 23.07.2009. - No surrender of undisclosed income was made during the course of the search. - After the seizure and analysis…

Ravindra Reddy Pallavalli, Hyd, Hyderabad vs. ITO, Ward-8(2), Hyderabad

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 763/HYD/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Mar 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devishri Ravinder Reddy Vs Income Tax Officer Pallavali Ward 8(2) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan: Amhpp 1849 B (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Smt. N. Swapna, DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 80C

…3 of 7 ITA No 763 of 2016 Ravindra Reddy Pallavalli Hyderabad. Sangameshwara Associates (Supra) for coming to this conclusion. She also placed reliance upon the following other decisions: a) MAK Data (P.) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax – II reported in 358 ITR 593 (S.C) b) CIT Vs. Rakesh Suri reported in 331 ITR 458 (All) 8. Having regard to the rival contentions and the material on record, I find that the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act is leviable for concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. In the case before us, the assessee was directed to explain the sources for the…

Nse It Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 8(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5935/MUM/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.5935/Mum/2014 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2005-06) बिाम/ M/S. Nse. It Ltd, Dcit 8(2), Mumbai Trade Globe, Ground Floor, Andheri Kurla Road, V. Andheri (E), Mumbai 400059 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan : Aabcn0159P (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri. Sunil NahtaFor Respondent: Shri. T.A Khan(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…even in proceedings conducted by Revenue u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 143(2) , the assessee did not came forward to disclose the said income. The learned DR drew our attention to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Mak Data Private Limited v. CIT (2013) 358 ITR 593(SC) and submitted that penalty will be levied u/s 271(1)(c) even if the said income is declared in the return of income filed in pursuance to notices issued u/s 148 . It was submitted that no challenge has been made by the assessee to the issuance of notice u/s. 148. The assessee relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case o…

Joshi Wadewale Shewalwadi, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, appeals in the case of Mrs

ITA 99/PUN/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Mar 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.95 & 96/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010-11

For Appellant: S/Shri Nikhil Pathak /For Respondent: Shri Hitendra Ninawe
Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

…ed. The CIT(A) held that the provisions of Explanation 5A were clearly applicable. Further, reliance was placed on the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in MAK Data ITA Nos.95 & 96/PUN/2016 & Ors. 7 Vasundhara S Joshi & Ors P. Ltd. Vs. CIT (2013) 358 ITR 593 (SC). Another aspect which was covered by CIT(A) was that once the assessee admits that certain amount represents her income, no further evidence would be necessary to show that it was amount which represented her income or that it represented her concealed income. Reliance in this regard was placed on various decisions of different High Courts.…

Mrs. Vasundhara Shailesh Joshi, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, appeals in the case of Mrs

ITA 96/PUN/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Mar 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.95 & 96/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010-11

For Appellant: S/Shri Nikhil Pathak /For Respondent: Shri Hitendra Ninawe
Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

…ed. The CIT(A) held that the provisions of Explanation 5A were clearly applicable. Further, reliance was placed on the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in MAK Data ITA Nos.95 & 96/PUN/2016 & Ors. 7 Vasundhara S Joshi & Ors P. Ltd. Vs. CIT (2013) 358 ITR 593 (SC). Another aspect which was covered by CIT(A) was that once the assessee admits that certain amount represents her income, no further evidence would be necessary to show that it was amount which represented her income or that it represented her concealed income. Reliance in this regard was placed on various decisions of different High Courts.…

Mrs. Vasundhara Shailesh Joshi, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, appeals in the case of Mrs

ITA 95/PUN/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Mar 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.95 & 96/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010-11

For Appellant: S/Shri Nikhil Pathak /For Respondent: Shri Hitendra Ninawe
Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

…ed. The CIT(A) held that the provisions of Explanation 5A were clearly applicable. Further, reliance was placed on the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in MAK Data ITA Nos.95 & 96/PUN/2016 & Ors. 7 Vasundhara S Joshi & Ors P. Ltd. Vs. CIT (2013) 358 ITR 593 (SC). Another aspect which was covered by CIT(A) was that once the assessee admits that certain amount represents her income, no further evidence would be necessary to show that it was amount which represented her income or that it represented her concealed income. Reliance in this regard was placed on various decisions of different High Courts.…

Joshi Wadewale Hadapsar, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, appeals in the case of Mrs

ITA 105/PUN/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Mar 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.95 & 96/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010-11

For Appellant: S/Shri Nikhil Pathak /For Respondent: Shri Hitendra Ninawe
Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

…ed. The CIT(A) held that the provisions of Explanation 5A were clearly applicable. Further, reliance was placed on the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in MAK Data ITA Nos.95 & 96/PUN/2016 & Ors. 7 Vasundhara S Joshi & Ors P. Ltd. Vs. CIT (2013) 358 ITR 593 (SC). Another aspect which was covered by CIT(A) was that once the assessee admits that certain amount represents her income, no further evidence would be necessary to show that it was amount which represented her income or that it represented her concealed income. Reliance in this regard was placed on various decisions of different High Courts.…