Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2013 (3) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (3) TMI 264 - HC - Income TaxPenalty being 300% by invoking Section 271(1)(c) - as per AO assessee failed to furnish complete details from bank statement - ITAT deleted the levy - Held that:- On going through the materials placed before this Court, it is seen that the AO has subsequently found that the said deposit was made for the period commencing from 01.04.2004 to 29.03.2005. Therefore, when the AO himself has found that the said deposit was not made on a single day, it cannot be said that the assessee had failed to furnish complete particulars. The Tribunal has categorically found that in the return, the assessee had shown the income on estimate basis at Rs.1,99,440/- and such estimation of income was enhanced by the Assessing Officer and consequently, imposed penalty. Therefore, from the above facts it is clear that levy of penalty was based on the estimation of income. There cannot be any imposition of penalty based on estimation of income. As decided in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Reliance Petroproducts (P) Ltd. 2010 (3) TMI 80 - SUPREME COURT) in order to bring the case under Section 271(1)(c) there has to be concealment of particulars of the income of the assessee and the assessee must have furnished inaccurate particulars of his income. Here, it is the admitted case that the assessee filed revised profit and loss account statement showing the net profit of Rs.3,92,649/- being 5% on Rs.78,52,980/- and the same having been done before the assessment was completed, thus we fail to understand as to how the Revenue is justified in imposing penalty under Section 271(1)(c) - appeal filed by the Revenue dismissed - against the Revenue.
|