- (1.) THE present appeal is filed by the assessee under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order dated 28.02.2005 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Agra in I.T.A. No. 187/Agra/2000 for the assessment year 1996 -97.
(2.) ON 07.09.2007, a coordinate Bench has admitted the appeal on the following substantial questions of law : (a) Whether upon the facts and circumstances of the case, Tribunal was justified in holding that the surrender made by the appellant of an amount of Rs. 1,47,000/ - deposited by various parties shown in the Balance -sheet attached to the return of income has not been filed voluntarily and in good faith? (b) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct that when the appellant was concerned by the Assessing Officer from all sides, then only appellant made the surrender of Rs. 1,47,000/ -? (c)Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in overlooking fact that the Assessing Officer did not allow further time for producing the depositors and the appellant just to purchase peace had surrendered the said amount? (d)Whether there was any material available to show that the amount surrendered by the appellant was its concealed income and the Tribunal has overlooked this vital aspect? (e) Whether upon the facts and circumstance of the case, the additions under section 68 can be treated as a concealed income of the appellant for imposing penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act?
(3.) THE brief facts of the case are that the assessee has filed the return on 24.12.1996, when his case come under scrutiny, then the assessee has revised the return and has surrendered a sum of Rs. 1,47,000/ - pertaining to the cash credit. The A.O. has made the addition at Rs. 1,47,000/ - and at the same time initiated the penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act and levied the penalty of Rs. 60,000/ -. The same was confirmed by the appellate authorities. Not being satisfied, the assessee has filed the present appeal. With this background, Shri Shakeel Ahmad, the learned counsel for the assessee has submitted that the penalty amount at the rate of 100% comes to Rs. 58,800/ -, but the A.O. has levied the penalty with the wrong figure of Rs. 60,000/ -. He further submits that there was no malafide intention on the part of the assessee. The amount of Rs. 1,47,000/ - represents to the cash credits from eight persons, each deposit was less than Rs. 20,000/ -. To support his argument, he relied on the ratio laid down in the following cases : - CIT Vs. M.P. Narayanan, 1998 149 CTR(Mad) 1;