2018 (4) TMI 1727 - AT - Income Tax

Penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) - AO brought to tax income to tax as income under the head income from other sources as against income declared by the assessee as income under the head income from house property - no benefit of expenses were allowed which was claimed to be incurred in relation to the earning of said income as the assessee could not show that these expenses were incurred in connection with the services for which service charges were received - HELD THAT - It is the claim of the assessee that the expenses were incurred exclusively for earning the said income and if the opportunity is provided the assessee will be able prove its case that these expenses were genuinely bonafdily exclusively and wholly incurred for providing services to Tata Teleservices Maharashtra Limited . The matter need to be restored back to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication on merits in accordance with law . Needless to say that the AO shall provide proper and adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee in accordance with the principal of natural justice. The onus is on assessee to prove that these expenses which were debited to Income and Expenditure Account against service charges received from Tata Teleservices Maharashtra Limited credited to Income and Expenditure Account were genuinely wholly exclsuively and bonafidely incurred in relation to services rendered as per contract to Tata Teleservices Maharashtra Limited. The AO shall allow assessee to file necessary evidences / explanation in support of its contentions. - Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Summary

Issues:
Assessment of income under different heads, Penalty under section 271(1)(c) for inaccurate particulars of income and concealment of income, Compliance with principles of natural justice.

Assessment of Income under Different Heads:
The appellant, a Co-operative Group Housing Society, declared income from house property but did not offer to tax service charges received from Tata Teleservices Maharashtra Ltd. The AO considered the service charges as income from other sources due to agreements for providing services like lift, security guard, etc. The AO brought the total income to tax at a gross level, leading to a penalty under section 271(1)(c). The learned CIT(A) confirmed the addition of service charges but accepted the claim regarding license fees. The tribunal observed the need for proper adjudication on the expenses incurred in connection with the service charges, directing the matter to be restored back to the AO for fresh assessment.

Penalty under Section 271(1)(c) for Inaccurate Particulars of Income and Concealment of Income:
The AO levied a penalty under section 271(1)(c) against the appellant for concealment of income related to service charges. The learned CIT(A) upheld the penalty, emphasizing the lack of evidence regarding the nature of expenses incurred. The tribunal noted the appellant's claim of genuine and bonafide expenses and ordered the matter to be reconsidered by the AO, stressing the importance of providing a fair opportunity for the appellant to prove its case.

Compliance with Principles of Natural Justice:
The appellant contended that proper opportunity was not given by the authorities to prove its case regarding the expenses incurred. The tribunal acknowledged the need for adherence to the principles of natural justice and directed the matter to be sent back to the AO for fresh adjudication, ensuring the appellant's right to present evidence and explanations. The tribunal allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, emphasizing the importance of a fair and just assessment process.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the issues of income assessment, penalty imposition, and compliance with principles of natural justice, providing a comprehensive overview of the legal proceedings and decisions involved.