Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2016 (12) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (12) TMI 1614 - AT - Income TaxPenalty u/s 271(1)(c) - deduction u/s 54F allowability - Held that:- JDA agreement was not completed and assessee had not received the balance payments and had also not received the flat as promised in the agreement. The ld. CIT(A) has also held that the belief of the assessee that the capital gains on which he had to pay tax has to be computed only on the basis of the amount which he had actually received, cannot be considered to be totally unreasonable. It is undisputed fact that in the present case the assessee had invested ₹ 17,65,000/- towards investment in residential house and had claimed deduction to that extent and Assessing Officer has also allowed deduction. Therefore, keeping in view of the decision in the case of C.S. Atwal Vs. CIT, Ludhiana [2015 (7) TMI 878 - PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT ] the assessee was required to pay capital gain tax only on the amount received which in the present case is ₹ 15,00,000/- and for which assessee has been allowed deduction u/s 54F. Therefore, no capital gains tax was payable during the year and if there was no capital gain tax payable, the question of penalty does not arise. In view of the above facts and circumstances the assessee cannot be said to have concealed the particulars of his income. - Decided in favour of assessee.
|