Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2019 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (2) TMI 1189 - ITAT MUMBAIPenalty u/s. 271(1)(c) - disallowance u/s 57(iii) - scrutiny assessment - statutory notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1) calling for details - assessee has filed a revised return during the course of assessment - HELD THAT:- Explanation of the assessee is that the assessee has noted certain mistakes in the computation of income in the return filed and since the return was belated one, it could not file the revised return. During the course of assessment in the first submission before the detection by the A.O., the assessee submitted the revised return. These submissions have not been disputed by the A.O., rather he has said that the assessee could have submitted the revised return at the TAPAL of the A.O. We find that the facts of the case clearly indicate the bonafide of the assessee. It is settled that unless the conduct of the assessee is contumacious, penalty cannot be levied. See Hindustan Steel Ltd. vs. State of Orissa [1969 (8) TMI 31 - SUPREME COURT] - justification in refusing to impose penalty, when there is a technical or venial breach of the provisions of the Act, or where the breach flows from a bonafide belief that the offender is not liable to act in the manner prescribed by the statute.. Thus we delete the penalty levied in this case. - Decided in favour of assessee.
|