Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2011 (8) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2011 (8) TMI 21 - HC - Income TaxPenalty u/s 271(1)(c)- Concealment of income - During the year under consideration, there is an increase of Rs.3 as security deposit. The assessee was asked to explain the same - As regard the deposit of Rs. 3 crores is reflected in the bank account as per photocopy submitted by the assessee, it has been explained by the assessee vide its letter dated 05.03.2001 as under:- The receipt of Rs. 3 crores as security deposit by the assessee company from M/s Daewoo Motors (I) Ltd flows from the MOU entered into between them - The relevant clasue 8, 9, 10 and 11 of the MOU have been reproduced in our letter dated 06.02.2001 - In terms of clause 9 of the MOU, the fee payable by DMIL to MIL will accrue on the date on which the contract between the DTC and DMIL is signed or on which the DTC places an order on DMIL for the supply of buses - The order or the contract has yet not been awarded by DTC and hence the security deposit of Rs.3 cores has not yet changed its character and remains as a security deposit with the assessee company - This would amply demonstrate that the assessee had not concealed the particulars of his income nor it is a case where the assessee deliberately furnished inaccurate particulars of such income. This would also demonstrate that two views were possible and the claim of the assessee was bona fide - There would be no question of inviting the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. - Decided in favour of assessee.
|