Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2023 (11) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (11) TMI 1003 - HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURTPenalty u/s 271(1)(c) - determination of correct head of income - debatable issue - Allegation that, assessee had deliberately claimed the income received from sale of shares as “Long Term Capital Gain” instead of “Profit and Gains of Business” - bonafide of the contention raised by the assessee to protect levy of penalty - ITAT deleted penalty levy - HELD THAT:- Merely making incorrect claim under a particular head of income, while furnishing full information about the transactions in question, would not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars. This is because no statement made or detail supplied was found to be factually incorrect. See Reliance Petroproducts Private Limited [2010 (3) TMI 80 - SUPREME COURT]. This is also the view taken in M/s Anant Overseas P Ltd [2014 (9) TMI 432 - DELHI HIGH COURT] reiterated therein that the question whether the shares were held as investment or stock in trade is highly debatable and a difficult call in many a case, and that merely because the assessee made an incorrect claim in law, it would not tantamount to furnishing inaccurate particulars inviting penalty. Since the assessee-respondent had not suppressed the amount in question and had disclosed it in its return, merely because he declared it under a particular “head of income”, and the AO chose to treat the same under some other head, the assessee-respondent cannot be accused of furnishing incorrect particulars of income or suppressing facts. Decided in favour of assessee.
|