TMI Blog2022 (6) TMI 477X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of assessee to furnish the information to the satisfaction of Ld. Tax Authority. Therefore, in these circumstances levying of penalty and its sustenance in appeal deserve to be set aside - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No.3282/Del/2019 - - - Dated:- 8-6-2022 - Sh. Shamim Yahya, Accountant Member And Sh. Anubhav Sharma, Judicial Member For the Assessee : None For the Revenue : Shri Tufail Tahir, Sr. DR ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM: The assessee has come in appeal against order dated 09.01.2019 in appeal no. 167/17-18/ CIT(A)-15 for the assessment year 2012-13 passed by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-15, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the First Appellate Authority or in short Ld. F.A.A. ) i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appeal are independent of, and without prejudice to one another : 1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the order passed by the Ld CIT(A) under section 250 of the Act confirming penalty amounting to Rs. 39,45,378/- is wrong and bad in law as there was neither any concealment of income nor furnishing of any inaccurate particulars of income by the Appellant. 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT(A) has grossly erred in confirming penalty levied by Ld. AO under section 27i(i)(c)of the Act in respect of the following disallowances made in the assessment order, disregarding the submissions made by the appellant in this regard: a. Disallowance of INR 1,13, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... alf of the assessee in spite of notice being issued. As the matter was pertaining to merely the penalty proceedings no further notices were justified and arguments of Ld. CIT(A) were heard. 5. It was submitted on behalf of Sr. DR that assessee has been constant defaulter not coming up with any assistance at any stage of assessment or appeals and therefore levy of penalty was justified. 6. The bench has given thoughtful consideration to the matter on record and it comes up from the same that the initial assessment order was passed on 13.12.2011 which was challenged by the assessee and Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 21.02.2013 had confirmed additions. The assessee challenged the CIT(A) order before this Tribunal and by order dated 29.10.20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lip N. Shroff Vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai Anr. [Supra] had made following observations as with regard to concept of furnishing inaccurate information; In Webster's Dictionary, inaccurate has been defined as: not accurate, not exact or correct; not according to truth; erroneous; as an inaccurate statement, copy or transcript. 44. It signifies a deliberate act or omission on the part of the assessee. Such deliberate act must be either for the purpose of concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars. 45. The term 'inaccurate particulars' is not defined. Furnishing of an assessment of value of the property may not by itself be furnishing of inaccurate particulars. Even if the ex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 71(1)(c) would embrace the details of the claim made. Where no information given in the return is found to be incorrect or inaccurate, the assessee cannot be held guilty of furnishing inaccurate particulars. In order to expose the assessee to penalty, unless the case is strictly covered by the provision, the penalty provision cannot be invoked. By no stretch of imagination can making an incorrect claim tantamount to furnishing inaccurate particulars. There can be no dispute that everything would depend upon the return filed by the assessee, because that is the only document where the assessee can furnish the particulars of his income. When such particulars are found to be inaccurate, the liability would arise. To attract penalty, the detail ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
