Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2017 (3) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (3) TMI 900 - HC - Income TaxPenalty under Section 271(1)(c) - apportionment of foreign exchange fluctuation loss between the Tonnage Income and Non Tonnage Income while filing the return of income for A. Y. 2007-08 - whether socalled voluntary disclosure was not voluntary? - Held that:- The so-called mistake as claimed by the assesssee, was only after notices dated 14th January, 2009 were issued under Sections 142 and 143 of the Act. It was only an attempt to preempt the Revenue finding out the the appellant had furnished inaccurate particulars. Therefore, it cannot be said that it was voluntary disclosure. In fact, the Apex Court in MAK Data (P) Ltd., (2013 (11) TMI 14 - SUPREME COURT ) has held that voluntary disclosure itself does not release the assessee from penal consequences. In the peculiar fact of the present case, the socalled voluntary disclosure was only after the Assessing Officer initiated proceedings under Section 142 of the Act. Thus, it was not a voluntary disclosure. In fact, the Assessment Order dated 24th December, 2009 under Section 143(3) of the Act also records the fact of verification by the Assessing Officer, leading to a finding that the appellant-assessee had debited foreign exchange loss to arrive its non-tonnage income. This order was accepted and no grievance in respect of the same being found by the Assessing Officer, was made by the appellant-assessee. It is only in penalty proceedings that this issue is raised for the first time. Further, the appellant-assessee besides stating it is a mistake, has not offered any explanation. Therefore, the explanation under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act was not found to be satisfactory by the authorities under the Act and penalty imposed and sustained. - Decided against assessee
|