Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2014 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (6) TMI 770 - AT - Income TaxPenalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act – Addition made u/s 68 of the Act – Gifts received from various persons - Held that:- There is no discussion in the penalty order in respect of gift of Rs 13,00,000/- received from the seven persons as to why the AO was satisfied that it represents concealed income of the assessee and liable for penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act - such an order of penalty is unsustainable - penalty proceeding is different from assessment proceeding and the considerations which apply in penalty proceeding is different from the considerations that apply in an assessment proceeding – Relying upon Vasantlal Amrutlal Doriwala (HUF) Prop. of M/s. Nirav Rayon’s Versus Income Tax Officer [2014 (6) TMI 527 - ITAT AHMEDABAD] - the declaration of gift was filed by the assessee. Copies of those declarations are furnished before us in a compilation. Penalty has been levied by invoking the deeming provisions under Section 68 of the IT Act - deeming provisions cannot be extended to hold that the assessee has concealed the income especially when the assessee has placed on record certain evidences such as gift declarations and bank accounts to show that the gift was received under bona fide belief that the same was a genuine gift - it was taxed during assessment proceedings but the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) cannot be levied automatically - no material could be brought on record by the AO to show that the amount added u/s. 68 in the assessment proceedings represents the actual concealed income of the assessee – thus, the penalty levied in respect of entire addition is unsustainable – Decided in favour of Assessee.
|