Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2016 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (5) TMI 857 - AT - Income TaxLevy of penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) - Held that:- There was neither furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income nor concealing the particulars of income. The assessee had filed all the details of transaction in the return of income itself. There was difference of opinion between the AO and the assessee as to under which head the sale proceeds of transaction should be taxed. The assessee had offered income under the head ‘capital gain’ whereas the AO taxed the same as ‘business income’. In our opinion, in such cases, no penalty should be levied u/s. 271(1)(c ) of the Act. Confirmation of an addition by Appellate Authority do not justify levy of penalty u/s. 271(1)(c), as the assessment proceedings and penalty proceedings are different so decision taken during the assessment stage would not and should not lead to automatic levy of concealment penalty. It has to be seen that what explanation was offered by the assessee while filing reply to the penalty notice. After going through the explanation filed by the assessee, we are of the opinion that it was one of the plausible explanation. The issue of taxing a particular income under the head business income or income arising of capital gains is a debatable issue. In our opinion no penalty should be levied in such circumstances. Therefore, upholding the order of the FAA, we decide the effective ground of appeal against the AO. - Decided in favour of assessee
|