Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2014 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (11) TMI 98 - AT - Income TaxLevy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) – Undisclosed income – Inaccurate particulars furnished by assessee - Held that:- The assessee had filed revised return after a survey was conducted at the business premises of the assessee, that he admitted an additional income of ₹ 75 lakhs, that the AO held that the assessee had not disclosed the cash receipts in the original return, that he levied penalty u/s 271(1)(c)of the Act – The assessee had filed the revised return only after the survey action, therefore, it cannot be held that it was a voluntary return - filing of such a return cannot be termed voluntary filing of return - the rebuttal of the assessee is neither relevant materials and not cogent - the omission or wrong statement by the assessee in the original return was not due to any bona fide or inadvertent mistake on his part - there is proper application of mind on part of the AO and there is recording of an opinion on his part that a case for initiation of penalty proceedings was made as there was furnishing of incorrect particulars by the assessee, with an intention to avoid payment of tax - there is a distinction between furnishing of wrong particulars and making a wrong calculation on the basis of the particulars furnished and a mistaken calculation is distinct from concealment. There existed an intent to prevent relevant facts from becoming known - The assessee does have a duty to verify the particulars furnished by him are accurate - If all the circumstances and developments till the assessment is completed are taken into consideration, their collective effect show that the revised return was filed only after the evidences for filing inaccurate particulars were detected - the AO had held that commission/brokerage income of ₹ 39.12 lakhs were not offered for taxation for the year under consideration - the assessee not disclosed a part of his income, while filing his return and it was only after the survey that he revised the return - an intention of concealment of true particulars of income or deliberate furnishing of inaccurate particulars by the assessee was established by the AO - the AO had not accepted any conditional admission, rather his order is based on facts relevant for the year – thus, the order of the FAA is set aside – Decided in favour of revenue.
|