Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2015 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (1) TMI 1227 - AT - Income TaxPenalty u/s. 271(1)(c) - assessee had voluntarily admitted the mistake of inclusion of professional fees in exempted income from mutual fund - CIT(A) deleted penalty levy - Held that:- In the present case, the AO in the penalty order u/s. 271(1) ( c) of the Act dated 30-06- 2010 himself observed that the error reveals a casual and irresponsible attitude towards tax accounting. Similarly, the assessee debited a sum of ₹ 2,76,893/- as partners’ salary on the basis of original partnership deed. But the AO on examination of the same found that there was no such provision in the current deed. The assessee is not contested the said addition. Therefore, the additions made by the AO was justified. However, it is well settled that the assessment and the penalty proceedings are different and distinct proceedings and even when addition is made for certain reasons, it cannot be said that the assessee had furnished inaccurate particulars of income or concealed the income. the mistake was committed by the accountant of the assessee. Even it was not noticed by the AO, and the assessee itself during the course of assessment proceedings while preparing the details from its ledger accounts came to know the said mistake had been committed by the accountant and proposed for addition. Therefore, through a bonafide and inadvertent error the assessee claimed the income as exempt and wrongly provided for partners‘ salary. But the submissions of the assessee was that the error occurred by a mistake of its accountant, who treated the said professional income as Income from Mutual Funds’ and the salary was claimed on the basis of the clause mentioned in the original partnership deed was not found to be false. We, therefore, keeping in view of the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Price Waterhouse Coopers Pvt. Ltd (2012 (9) TMI 775 - SUPREME COURT ) are of the view that the ld.CIT(A) was justified in deleting the penalty so levied by the AO. - Decided in favour of assessee.
|