Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2015 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (10) TMI 160 - AT - Income TaxLevying penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) - expenses not related to earning of income u/s. 56 - AO held that as per the provisions of section 57 assessee could claim expenses u/s. 57 to the expenditure if same were necessary to earn the income u/s.56, that it was impossible to incur expenses of ₹ 4.83 Lakhs to the earn income of ₹ 1,00,308/-,that the expenses were not related to earning of income u/s. 56 - Held that:- Undisputed facts of the case are that the assessee borrowed funds for making investment in shares,that she paid interest for purchasing shares,that she made claim of interest expenditure under the head income from other sources,that under that head the assessee had shown loss,that quantum addition was not challenged by her,that AO and FAA were of the opinion that she had filed inaccurate particulars.The assessee was very well aware about the borrowing of the funds and their utilisation. The claim made by the assessee under the provisions of a particular section (section 57)shows that she knew the implication of such claim.Under the Act,the income of an assessee is one and various sections direct the modes in which the income is to be levied. No one of those sections can be treated as general or specific for the purpose of any one particular source of income ; they are all specific and deal with various heads in which an item of income of an assessee falls. These sections are mutually exclusive and where an item of income falls specifically under one head, it has to be charged under that head and no other.Similarly,expenditure incurred by the assessee are directly related to the heads under which same could be claimed. If the assessee makes a claim to reduce his or her tax incidence by changing the heads of expenditure it has to be held that the particulars filed by him or her are not accurate. A return is not only an ordinary documentary. Assessees have to verify the returns and declare that details furnished are true. Therefore,when an totally unsustainable claim is made it cannot be considered a debatable claim about which two views were possible. In the matter before us,there is no ambiguity about the section under which claim for interest expenditure could be made and the assessee knew it.Non filing of appeal against the quantum order prove that the assessee took a chance while filing the return and made a claim that was not permissible by law at all. We are of opinion that the assessee was guilty of filing inaccurate particular of income and thus concealing her income. We hold that the order of the FAA does not suffer from any legal infirmity. Penalty confirmed - confirming his order we decide effective ground of appeal against the assessee.
|