Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2018 (12) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (12) TMI 828 - HC - Income TaxPenalty u/s 271(1)(c) - concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars, by making a claim for deduction under Section 36(1)(viii) - CIT-A held that the assessee had paid advance tax for the Assessment Year 2003-04, without including and computing benefit of deduction under Section 36(1) (viii) which would indicate and show that the assessee was not entitled to the benefit - Held that:- We do not agree that payment of advance tax would show and establish lack of bonafides. It is not only the assessee bank who had verily believed their entitlement to deduction under clause (viii); even officers of the Central Board of Direct Taxes were of the same opinion. Bonafides, therefore, of the assessee cannot be doubted or debated as advance tax was paid. There is no column of income tax returns whereby the assessee, in case of claim, can call upon Assessing Officer to decide and adjudicate claim for deduction. Provisions of Advance Ruling were not applicable. Therefore, to claim any benefit of any deduction, a claim is required to be made in the return with full particulars and details. Bonafides are accordingly examined with reference to statutory provision, which is required to be interpreted, and whether interpretation placed by assessee was plausible and could have been accepted. Where the explanation is not make belief and sham but genuine, the assessee would satisfy the requirement of Explanation 1 to Section 271(1)(c). This test and requirement is satisfied in the present case. Further, full and complete facts were clearly stated in the income tax returns. In our opinion, the assessee had acted bonafidely and were under a genuine belief that they were entitled to benefit of the said deduction - Decided against revenue
|