Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2019 (8) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (8) TMI 1422 - ITAT DELHIPenalty levied u/s. 271 (1) (c) - bogus rental income claimed - - assessment framed u/s. 153 A r.w.s 143 (3) - assessee claimed deduction u/s.24(a)(b) @ 30% and also claimed interest on loan and under the head “income from house property” a loss was declared - as per assessee AO has not specified under which limb of section 271 (1) (c) the penalty has been levied - HELD THAT:- The undisputed fact is that the rental income claim by the assessee and the interest on housing loan claimed by the assessee did not find any favour with the appellate authorities. A perusal of the order of the Tribunal clearly establishes that the assessee had claimed the rental income and the interest on housing loan on wrong facts. Therefore, to this extent we do not find any merits in the case of the assessee that the claim was bonafide, though, not allowed by the revenue authorities and, therefore, the penalty levied u/s. 271 (1) (c ) of the Act should be deleted. Penalty notice did not specify under which limb of the section the penalty proceedings have been initiated - This issue was never raised before the first appellate authority and has been raised for the first time before the Tribunal. We agree with the DR that the question whether correct limb has been applied is a question of fact and not a question of law. As decided in SUNDARAM FINANCE SERVICES LTD.) VERSUS THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX [2018 (5) TMI 259 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] even assuming that there was a defect in the notices, it had caused no prejudice to the assessee, which had understood the purport and import of the notices issued under section 274 read with section 271. In the notices the relevant columns had been marked, more particularly, when the case against the assessee was that they had concealed particulars and had furnished inaccurate particulars of income. The issue was not a question of fact. The assessee had, at no earlier point of time, raised the plea before the authorities that on account of the defect in the notices it was put to prejudice. No merit in the fresh claim of the assessee. Moreover neither the assessee has moved any application for raising any additional ground nor he has been able to bring out any question of law which can be raised before the appellate authority for the first time. - Decided against assessee.
|