DCIT vs. Kapil Jaiswal

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The case involves an appeal by the Department of Income Tax (DCIT) against the decision of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (CIT(A)) to delete a penalty imposed on the assessee, Kapil Jaiswal, under Section 271AAB of the Income-tax Act. The penalty was imposed based on undisclosed income discovered during a search under Section 132 of the Act. The assessee had declared the income from Long Term Capital Gains (LTCG) in his return and paid advance tax on it. The CIT(A) found that the ingredients of Section 271AAB were not fulfilled and deleted the penalty. The DCIT argued that the penalty should have been imposed as the assessee would not have disclosed the income without the search. However, the Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, finding that the assessee's income was not undisclosed income as defined under Section 271AAB.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the penalty imposed under Section 271AAB of the Income-tax Act is justified.
• 2. Whether the ingredients of Section 271AAB were fulfilled.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Partly Assessee / Partly Revenue.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• ITA No.2145/Del/2024

  Delhi bench

• Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Visakhapatnam Bench, Visakhapatnam

  Visakhapatnam bench

• Rajesh B. Jain as Legal Heir of Bhanwarlal Jain vs. ITO, Ward-19(1)(1)

• Sanjay Kumar Khemka vs. DCIT, CC-3(4), Kolkata

• Shri Umesh Saboo vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle-2, Jaipur

  Jaipur bench

• M/s River Valley Flour Mills Pvt. ltd. Vs. ACIT, Central Circle -1

  Patna Bench benchAY 2015-16Allowed