Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2017 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (1) TMI 557 - AT - Income TaxPenalty u/s 271(1)(c) - addition made on protected assessment - Held that:- It is well settled law that the assessment proceedings and penalty proceedings are separate and distinct as held in the case of Anatharam Veerasinghaiah & Co. vs. CIT [1980 (4) TMI 2 - SUPREME Court]. We agree with the contention of the assessee’s counsel that merely because an addition has not been contested, it cannot be presumed that the addition represents concealed income and placed the reliance of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Sir Shadilal Sugar & General Mills Ltd. [1987 (7) TMI 3 - SUPREME Court] that from the assessee agreeing to additions to his income, it does not follow that the amount agreed to be added was concealed income. Also further find that addition in this case was made on protected assessment/addition on estimated basis which is against the law laid down in the case of M/s Bahilal Manilal Patel vs. CIT (2014 (10) TMI 621 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT). Also further find that section 271(1)(c) postulates imposition of penalty for furnishing of inaccurate particulars and concealment of income. On the facts and circumstances of this case the assessee’s conduct cannot be said to be contumacious so as to warrant levy of penalty. - Decided in favour of assessee
|