Brinel Valerian Pias vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-42(2)(1)

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee, Brinel Valerian Pias, had not filed an income return for the year under consideration. The case was flagged under the Risk Management Strategy formulated by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT), leading to re-assessment proceedings initiated by the Assessing Officer (AO) under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The AO made an addition of Rs. 83,00,000/- as unexplained investment as the source of the investment remained unexplained due to the assessee's non-compliance. Penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) were initiated for concealment of particulars of income, and a penalty of Rs. 25,64,700/- was levied. The assessee appealed against the penalty imposed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) (CIT(A)), which was upheld. The assessee then appealed to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT).…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the penalty imposed by the AO and upheld by the CIT(A) is justified?

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Similar Judgements

• ITA No 838 of 2024 Raghavendra Bacha

  Hyderabad bench

• ITO VS ANNAMALAI

• Hashmat Ishaq Parker vs Income Tax Officer

  Mumbai Bench benchAY 2015-16, 2018-19Allowed

• Udayachal Goregaon Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. vs. ITO Ward 41(4)(4), Mumbai

  Mumbai bench

• Nevin H. Bharwani v/s Income Tax Officer (International Taxation)

• Marut Prasanth Gogineni vs. Income Tax Officer

  Visakhapatnam bench