ACIT, New Delhi V. M/s. ABAG Hi- Tech Education Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 472/DEL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4421 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 3 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-05-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 29-01-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ASHIMA NEB SENIOR
• Assessee Lawyers: AMIT SINGHANIA
• Keywords: Search and seizure; Document seized; Documents seized; Set aside
• Section: 271(1)(c); 132; 139

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH B : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.472/DEL./2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13) ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4, VS. M/S. ABAG HI-TECH EDUCA TION PVT. LTD., (ERSTWHILE CC 25) 106, VISHWADEEP TOWER, PLOT N O.4, NEW DELHI. DISTRICT CENTRE JANAKPURI, NEW DELHI 110 058. (PAN : AAHCA9880C) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI AMIT SINGHANIA, ADVOCATE REVENUE BY : MS. ASHIMA NEB, SENIOR DR DATE OF HEARING : 18.04.2019 DATE OF ORDER : 14.05.2019 O R D E R PER KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THE APPELLANT, ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4, NEW DELHI (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE REVENUE) BY FILIN G THE PRESENT APPEAL SOUGHT TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 03.11.2015 PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)- 23, NEW DELHI DELETING THE PENALTY LEVIED VIDE ORDER DATED 11.09.2014 PASSED U/S 271AAA OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (FOR SHORT THE ITA NO.472/DEL./2016 2 ACT), QUA THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13 ON THE GROUN DS INTER ALIA THAT :- ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN:- 1. THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IS NOT CORRECT IN LAW AN D FACTS. 2. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW IN DELETING THE PENALTY OF RS.2,18,10,000/- IMPOSED BY THE AO U/S 271AAA OF TH E INCOME TAX ACT ON ACCOUNT OF SURRENDERED AMOUNT OF RS.21,81,00,000/- DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH & SEI ZURE ACTION. 2. BRIEFLY STATED THE FACTS NECESSARY FOR ADJUDICAT ION OF THE CONTROVERSY AT HAND ARE : ON THE BASIS OF COMPLETED ASSESSMENT U/S 143 (3) OF THE ACT AT THE INCOME OF RS.20,82,66,620 /-, PENALTY PROCEEDINGS WERE INITIATED U/S 271AAA OF THE ACT ON ACCOUNT OF SURRENDERED AMOUNT OF RS.21,81,00,000/- AND OFFERED IN THE RETURN OF INCOME. DECLINING THE CONTENTIONS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE, AO PROCEEDED TO LEVY THE PENALTY OF RS.2,18,10,000/- U /S 271AA @ 10% OF THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME ON THE GROUND THAT TH E ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO SPECIFY THE MANNER IN WHICH SUCH INCOME H AS BEEN DERIVED AND THAT THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED U/S 139 (1) CANNOT BE CONSIDERED AS VOLUNTARY RETURN AS THE SAME WAS FILE D WHEN ASSESSEE WAS SUBJECTED TO SEARCH U/S 132 OF THE ACT. ITA NO.472/DEL./2016 3 3. ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BY WAY OF AN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A) WHO HAS DELETED THE PENALTY AFTER ACCEP TING THE APPEAL. FEELING AGGRIEVED, THE REVENUE HAS COME UP BEFORE T HE TRIBUNAL BY WAY OF FILING THE PRESENT APPEAL. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PARTIES TO THE APPEAL, GONE THROUGH THE DOCUMENTS R ELIED UPON AND ORDERS PASSED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES BELOW IN T HE LIGHT OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 5. UNDISPUTEDLY, THE ASSESSEE HAS ACCEPTED THE QUAN TUM ASSESSED BY THE AO AND CONFIRMED BY THE LD. CIT (A) . SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATION WAS CONDUCTED AT THE PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE U/S 132 OF THE ACT AND INCRIMINATING DOCUMENTS/ASSETS W ERE SEIZED AND CONSEQUENTLY ASSESSEE FILED RETURN AT ENHANCED INCO ME U/S 139(1) OF THE ACT. IT IS ALSO NOT IN DISPUTE THAT THE ASS ESSEE HAS ADMITTED IMPUGNED UNDISCLOSED INCOME IN HIS STATEMENT RECORD ED U/S 132 (4) OF THE ACT AND HAD PAID TAXES ALONG WITH INTEREST. LD. CIT (A) HAS DELETED THE PENALTY BY RELYING UPON THE DECISIONS R ENDERED BY THE TRIBUNAL AND HONBLE HIGH COURT MENTIONED IN PARA 4 .2.5 BY DRAWING THE CONCLUSION THAT THE AO HAS NEVER QUESTI ONED THE ASSESSEE DURING THE SEARCH OR DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AS TO THE MANNER IN WHICH THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME WAS D ERIVED. LD. CIT (A) ALSO OBSERVED THAT THE AO HAS NOT RECORDED HIS SATISFACTION ITA NO.472/DEL./2016 4 IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ITSELF BY RECORDING THE REA SONS ON THE BASIS OF WHICH HE WAS SATISFIED THAT THE PENALTY PROCEEDI NGS U/S 271AAA OF THE ACT IS LIABLE TO BE INITIATED AND LEVIED. 6. LD. DR FOR THE REVENUE CHALLENGING THE IMPUGNED ORDER CONTENDED THAT SUB-SECTION (2) OF SECTION 271AAA OF THE ACT DOES NOT CAST RESPONSIBILITY UPON THE AO TO QUESTION THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN THE MANNER IN WHICH THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME WAS DERIVED/ EARNED. LD. DR FOR THE REVENUE FURTHER CONTENDED T HAT IN CASE, THE ASSESSEE INTENDS TO AVAIL OF THE IMMUNITY FROM THE PENALTY U/S 271AAA THEN HE IS REQUIRED TO FULFILL THE REQUIREME NT LAID DOWN UNDER SUB-SECTION (2) OF SECTION 271AAA OF THE ACT. LD. DR FOR THE REVENUE ALSO FILED WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS WHICH HA VE BEEN MADE PART OF THE RECORD. 7. IN THE BACKDROP OF THE AFORESAID FACTS AND CIRCU MSTANCES OF THE CASE, ARGUMENTS ADDRESSED BY THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PARTIES TO THE APPEAL, CASE LAWS RELIED UPON, THE FIRST QUESTION ARISES FOR DETERMINATION IN THIS CASE IS :- AS TO WHETHER AO IS REQUIRED TO RECORD HIS SATISFA CTION AS IN THE CASE OF INITIATING THE PENALTY U/S 271(1) (C) OF THE ACT, BEFORE INITIATING PENALTY PROCEEDINGS U/S 271AAA OF THE ACT? 8. BARE PERUSAL OF THE PROVISIONS CONTAINED UNDER S ECTIONS 271(1)(C) AND 271AAA GO TO SHOW THAT U/S 271AAA, TH E ITA NO.472/DEL./2016 5 SATISFACTION OF THE AO FOR INITIATING THE PENALTY I S NOT THE SAME AS IN THE CASE OF SECTION 271(1)(C) BECAUSE U/S 271AAA (2 ) ESCAPE ROUTE HAS BEEN GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE ON FULFILLING THE TH REE CONDITIONS VIZ.:- (I) IN THE COURSE OF THE SEARCH, IN A STATEMENT UND ER SUB- SECTION (4) OF SECTION 132, ADMITS THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME AND SPECIFIES THE MANNER IN WHICH SUCH INCOME HAS BEEN DERIVED; (II) SUBSTANTIATES THE MANNER IN WHICH THE UNDISCLO SED INCOME WAS DERIVED; AND (III) PAYS THE TAX, TOGETHER WITH INTEREST, IF ANY, IN RESPECT OF THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME. 9. THE REQUIREMENT FOR INITIATING THE PENALTY PROCE EDINGS U/S 271AAA IS THAT SEARCH HAS BEEN INITIATED U/S 132 ON OR AFTER THE FIRST DAY OF JUNE 2007 BUT BEFORE 1 ST DAY OF JULY 2012 AND THAT UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF THE SPECIFIED PREVIOUS YEAR H AS BEEN UNEARTHED ON WHICH THE ASSESSEE SHALL PAY BY WAY OF PENALTY IN ADDITION TO TAX, IF ANY, A SUM COMPUTED @ 10% OF TH E UNDISCLOSED INCOME. 10. IN VIEW OF THE MATTER, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE LD. CIT (A) HAS DELETED THE PENALTY ON THE WRONG PR EMISE THAT THE AO HAS NOT RECORDED HIS SATISFACTION IN THE ASSESSM ENT ORDER ITSELF ITA NO.472/DEL./2016 6 AS TO THE REASONS WHY HE WAS SATISFIED THAT PENALTY U/S 271AAA SHOULD BE INITIATED. BECAUSE IN THE ASSESSMENT ORD ER AO SOUGHT TO INITIATE THE PENALTY PROCEEDINGS U/S 271AAA QUA THE SURRENDERED AMOUNT DURING SEARCH OPERATION WHICH IS IN ACCORDAN CE WITH THE PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN THE SECTION. EVEN OTHERWIS E, ALL THE CONDITIONS LAID DOWN TO INITIATE THE PENALTY PROCEE DINGS U/S 271AAA ARE COMPLETE AS DISCUSSED IN THE PRECEDING P ARAS. 11. NOW, THE NEXT QUESTION ARISES FOR DETERMINATION IN THIS CASE IS :- AS TO WHETHER ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO SUBSTANTIATE THE MANNER IN WHICH THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF RS.21,81,00,000/- WAS DERIVED AND IS LIABLE TO BE PENALIZED AS REQUIRED UNDER SUB-SECTION (2) OF SECT ION 271AAA OF THE ACT AS CONTENDED BY THE LD. DR FOR TH E REVENUE. 12. TO PROCEED FURTHER, PROVISIONS CONTAINED UNDER SECTION 271AAA (2) ARE REPRODUCED AS UNDER FOR READY PERUSA L :- 271AAA. (1) THE ASSESSING OFFICER MAY, NOTWITHSTANDING ANYTHING CONTAINED IN ANY OTHER PROVISIONS OF THIS ACT, DIRECT THAT, IN A CASE WHER E SEARCH HAS BEEN INITIATED UNDER SECTION 132 ON OR A FTER THE 1ST DAY OF JUNE, 2007 BUT BEFORE THE 1ST DAY OF JULY, 2012, THE ASSESSEE SHALL PAY BY WAY OF PENALTY, IN ADDITION TO TAX, IF ANY, PAYABLE BY HIM, A SUM COMP UTED AT THE RATE OF TEN PER CENT OF THE UNDISCLOSED INCO ME OF THE SPECIFIED PREVIOUS YEAR. (2) NOTHING CONTAINED IN SUB-SECTION (1) SHALL APPL Y IF THE ASSESSEE, ITA NO.472/DEL./2016 7 (I) IN THE COURSE OF THE SEARCH, IN A STATEMENT U NDER SUB-SECTION (4) OF SECTION 132, ADMITS THE UNDISCLO SED INCOME AND SPECIFIES THE MANNER IN WHICH SUCH INCOM E HAS BEEN DERIVED; (II) SUBSTANTIATES THE MANNER IN WHICH THE UNDISCL OSED INCOME WAS DERIVED; AND (III) PAYS THE TAX, TOGETHER WITH INTEREST, IF ANY , IN RESPECT OF THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME 13. UNDER SECTION 271AAA(2)(I) OF THE ACT, PENALTY @ 10% OF THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME SHALL NOT BE IMPOSED IF THE ASSESSEE, IN THE COURSE OF THE SEARCH, IN A STATEMENT UNDER SUB- SECTION (4) OF SECTION 132, ADMITS THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME AND SPEC IFIES THE MANNER IN WHICH SUCH INCOME HAS BEEN DERIVED AND SU BSTANTIATES THE MANNER IN WHICH THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME WAS DERI VED, AND PAYS THE TAX TOGETHER WITH INTEREST IF ANY ON THE U NDISCLOSED INCOME. 14. DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH PROCEEDINGS, STATEM ENT OF SHRI AMUL GABRANI WAS RECORDED U/S 132 (4) OF THE ACT ON 03.05.2012 BY CONFRONTING WITH THE SEIZED DOCUMENTS ANNEXURE A A-1, THE RELEVANT PORTION OF WHICH IS EXTRACTED FOR READY PE RUSAL AS UNDER :- Q.8 I AM SHOWING YOU PAGE NO. 20 OF ANNEXURE AA- 1, PLEASE EXPLAIN THE TRANSACTIONS MENTIONED IN THI S PAPER? A.8. ABAG HI-TECH EDUCATION PRIVATE LIMITED IS A JOINTLY PROMOTED COMPANY BY MYSELF AND MR. A.K. BISHNOI. IT HAS EARNED INCOME AMOUNTING TO RS.21.81 CRORES (APPROX) WHICH IN TURN WAS UTILIZED BY THE ITA NO.472/DEL./2016 8 COMPANY IN LAND DEVELOPMENT IMPROVEMENT & FACILITATION EXPENSES. Q.9 DO YOU WANT, TO SAY ANYTHING ELSE? A.9. IN ORDER TO BUY PEACE & AVOID LITIGATION WITH THE DEPARTMENT AND IN THE SPIRIT OF COOPERATION, I AMUL GABRANI AND MR. A. K. BISHNOI OFFER A SUM OF RS.19,77,06,696/- AND RS.20,34,15,254/- RESPECTIVEL Y AS THE ADDITIONAL INCOME ALONG WITH AN AMOUNT OF RS.21.81 CRORE (APPROX.) AS STATED ABOVE, AGGREGATI NG TO RS.61,92,41,340/- AS THE ADDITIONAL INCOME FOR THE F.Y. 2011-12 ON ACCOUNT OF SOME OMISSION/COMMISSION PAPERS OR DOCUMENTS SEIZED AND OR FOUND IN RESPECT OF GROUP COMPANIES AND OR INDIVIDUALS DURING THE COURS E OF SEARCH. THE ABOVE SURRENDER IS MADE WITH THE CLEAR UNDERSTANDING THAT THE NECESSARY TAX SHALL BE PAID BY ME AND THERE WILL BE NO PENAL ACTION BY THE DEPARTM ENT WHATSOEVER. THE ABOVE DISCLOSURE IS INCLUSIVE AND COMPRISES OF THE DISCLOSURE MADE ON 06.03.2012. THE SAME IS BEING MADE TO BUY PEACE AND AVOID LITIGATIO N WITH THE DEPARTMENT IN THE SPIRIT OF COOPERATION. 15. LD. CIT (A) BY RELYING UPON THE PROVISIONS CONT AINED U/S 271AAA (2) DELETED THE PENALTY BY RETURNING FOLLOWI NG FINDINGS :- 4.2.4 THE AO HAS OVER-LOOKED THE PROVISIONS OF SUB - SECTION (2) OF SECTION 271AAA OF THE ACT WHICH PROV IDES THAT PENALTY U/S 271AAA (1) SHALL NOT BE APPLICABLE IN CERTAIN CONDITIONS PRESCRIBED THEREIN. THE APPELLAN T HAD ADMITTED THE IMPUGNED UNDISCLOSED INCOME IN HIS STATEMENT U/S 132(4) OF THE ACT AND HAD PAID TAXES TOGETHER WITH INTEREST. AS REGARDS THE MANNER IN WH ICH THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME WAS DERIVED, APPARENTLY THE SAME WAS NEVER ASKED FROM THE APPELLANT, EITHER DUR ING THE SEARCH OR DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. 16. BARE PERUSAL OF AFORESAID FINDINGS RETURNED BY LD. CIT (A) GOES TO PROVE THAT THE LD. CIT (A) HAS MISCONCEIVED THE PROVISIONS ITA NO.472/DEL./2016 9 CONTAINED U/S 271AAA (2) BECAUSE IT WAS THE DUTY OF THE ASSESSEE TO SPECIFY THE MANNER IN WHICH SUCH INCOME HAS BEEN DERIVED AND TO SUBSTANTIATE THE MANNER IN WHICH THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME WAS DERIVED. ASSESSEE IN THIS CASE HAS MERELY STATED I N HIS STATEMENT RECORDED U/S 132 (4) THAT THE DETAILS WRITTEN ON TH E PAPER SHOW THE SPECULATIVE INCOME EARNED BY THE COMPANY DURING FY 2011-12 WHICH IN TURN WAS UTILIZED BY THE COMPANY IN LAND D EVELOPMENT IMPROVEMENT AND FACILITATION EXPENSES. WE ARE OF T HE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT TERMING THE SURRENDERED INCOME AS SPECUL ATIVE INCOME DOES NOT SPECIFY THE MANNER IN WHICH SUCH INCOME HA S BEEN DERIVED NOR IT AMOUNTS TO SUBSTANTIATING THE MANNER IN WHICH THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME WAS DERIVED. NO DOUBT, THE ASSE SSEE HAS ADMITTED THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME, PAID THE TAX TOGET HER WITH INTEREST THEREON BUT HAS FAILED TO COMPLY WITH THE OTHER CON DITIONS LAID DOWN UNDER SUB-SECTION (2) OF SECTION 271AAA OF THE ACT TO AVAIL OF THE AMNESTY PROVIDED UNDER THE SECTION. 17. THE LD. CIT (A) DELETED THE PENALTY ON THE PRE MISE THAT IF NO SPECIFIC QUESTION WAS PUT TO ASSESSEE U/S 132(4), I T CANNOT BE CONCLUDED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO REPLY OR SPECIFY/ SUBSTANTIATE THE MANNER OF CONCEALMENT. IT IS SETT LED PRINCIPLE OF LAW THAT ASSESSEE HAS TO SPECIFY THE MANNER IN WHIC H INCOME HAS BEEN DERIVED AND SUBSTANTIATED THE MANNER IN WHICH THE ITA NO.472/DEL./2016 10 UNDISCLOSED INCOME WAS DERIVED AT THE TIME OF SEARC H IN ITS STATEMENT RECORDED U/S 132(4) AND NOT THEREAFTER. 18. MOREOVER, ASSESSEE DURING RECORDING OF STATEMEN T U/S 132 (4) IN THE SEARCH PROCEEDINGS INSTEAD OF COMPLYING WITH THE PROVISIONS CONTAINED UNDER SUB-SECTION (2) OF SECTION 271AAA H ARPED ON HIS MERCY PETITION THAT, IN ORDER TO BUY PEACE AND AVOID LITIGATION WITH THE DEPARTMENT AND IN THE SPIRIT OF COOPERATIO N, SURRENDER IS BEING MADE AS ADDITIONAL INCOME FOR FY 2011-12 ON A CCOUNT OF SOME OMISSION/COMMISSION IN THE PAPERS OR DOCUMENTS SEIZED AND THE SAID SURRENDER IS MADE WITH A CLEAR UNDERSTANDI NG THAT NECESSARY TAX SHALL BE PAID BY HIM AND THERE WILL B E NO PENALTY ACTION BY THE DEPARTMENT. 19. LD. AR FOR THE ASSESSEE RELIED UPON THE DECISIO N RENDERED BY COORDINATE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN CASE OF SITA RAM GUPTA VS. ACIT IN ITA NO.1835/DEL/2013 ORDER DATED 30.06.2014 WHEREIN THE PENALTY HAS BEEN DELETED ON FULFILLING THE COND ITIONS BY THE ASSESSEE LAID DOWN U/S 271AAA (2) BUT IS NOT APPLIC ABLE TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 20. HONBLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI IN A CASE RELIED UP ON BY THE LD. CIT DR CITED AS PR.CIT VS. SMT. RITU SINGAL (2018) 92 TAXMANN.COM 224 (DELHI) AFTER DISCUSSING THE DECISIONS RELIED UPON BY THE LD. AR RENDERED BY HONBLE APEX COURT IN ACIT VS. ITA NO.472/DEL./2016 11 GEBILAL KANHAIALAL 348 ITR 561 (SC) AND MAK DATA (P .) LTD. VS. CIT 358 ITR 539 (SC), HONBLE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT IN CIT VS. MAHENDRA C. SHAH 299 ITR 305 (GUJ.), HONBLE ALLA HABAD HIGH COURT IN CIT VS. RADHA KISHAN GOEL - 278 ITR 4 54 (ALL.), HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN MOTHERS PRIDE EDUCATION PERSONNEL (P.) LTD. VS. DCIT ITA NO.3372 (DELHI OF 2011 DATED 12.10.2012 , REVERSED THE DECISION RENDERED BY THE TRIBUNAL SE TTING ASIDE THE PENALTY ON THE GROUND THAT IN THE ABSENCE OF THE QUERY RAISED BY THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER DURING THE COURSE OF RECORDING OF STATEMENT U/S 132 (4) TO SPECIFY AND SUBSTANTIATE T HE MANNER IN WHICH THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME WAS DERIVED BY RETURNI NG THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS :- 16. THAT THE INCOME WHICH WAS ULTIMATELY BROUGHT T O TAX PURSUANT TO THE DISCLOSURE MADE, WHICH WAS VOLUNTAR Y ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE IS STATING THE OBVIOUS. THE ASSESSE E MERELY STATED THAT THE SUMS ADVANCED WERE UNDISCLOSED INCOME. HOW EVER, SHE DID NOT SPECIFY HOW SHE DERIVED THAT INCOME AND WHA T HEAD IT FELL IN (RENT, CAPITAL GAIN, PROFESSIONAL OR BUSINESS IN COME OUT OF MONEY LENDING, SOURCE OF THE MONEY ETC). UNLESS SUC H FACTS ARE MENTIONED WITH SOME SPECIFICITY, IT CANNOT BE SAID THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FULFILLED THE REQUIREMENT THAT SHE, IN HER STATEMENT (UNDER SECTION 132 (4)) 'SUBSTANTIATES THE MANNER I N WHICH THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME WAS DERIVED'. SUCH BEING THE CAS E, THIS COURT IS OF OPINION THAT THE LOWER APPELLATE AUTHORITIES MISDIRECTED THEMSELVES IN HOLDING THAT THE CONDITIONS IN SECTIO N 271 AAA (2) WERE SATISFIED BY THE ASSESSEE. 21. IN THE INSTANT CASE, INSTEAD OF COMPLYING WITH THE PROVISIONS LAID DOWN U/S 271AAA (2) TO SPECIFY THE MANNER IN W HICH THE SURRENDERED INCOME HAS BEEN DERIVED AND TO SUBSTANT IATE THE ITA NO.472/DEL./2016 12 MANNER IN WHICH THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME WAS DERIVED, ASSESSEE MERELY HARPED UPON HIS STATEMENT THAT THE SURRENDER IS BEING MADE TO BUY PEACE AND TO AVOID LITIGATION WITH THE DEPAR TMENT IN THE SPIRIT OF COOPERATION, TO AVAIL OF THE ESCAPE ROUTE FROM THE PENALTY UNDER SUB-SECTION (2) OF SECTION 271AAA. SO, WHEN THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO SPECIFY THE MANNER AND SUBSTANTIATE T HE MANNER IN WHICH THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME WAS DERIVED RATHER EMB ARK UPON THE MERCY PLEA THAT HE IS MAKING SURRENDER TO BUY PEACE OF MIND AND AVOID LITIGATION, HE IS NOT ENTITLED FOR THE BENEFI T OF SECTION 271AAA(2) OF THE ACT. 22. IN VIEW OF WHAT HAS BEEN DISCUSSED ABOVE AND FO LLOWING THE DECISION RENDERED BY HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN CA SE CITED AS PR.CIT VS. SMT. RITU SINGAL (SUPRA), WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT LD. CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE PENALTY OF RS.2,18,10,000/- U/S 271AAA, HENCE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS HEREBY ALLOWED AND PENALTY ORDER PASSED BY THE A O IS RESTORED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON THIS 14 TH DAY OF MAY, 2019. SD/- SD/- (R.K. PANDA) (KULDIP SING H) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED THE 14 TH DAY OF MAY, 2019 TS ITA NO.472/DEL./2016 13 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1.APPELLANT 2.RESPONDENT 3.CIT 4.CIT(A)-23, NEW DELHI. 5.CIT(ITAT), NEW DELHI. AR, ITAT NEW DELHI.