Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2019 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (2) TMI 809 - AT - Income TaxLevy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - debatable issue - taxability of income and the year in which the income is to be taxed also in dispute - capital gain - Held that:- The assessee has taken a different view and under the impression that the receipt is not taxable at all and even if it is taxable it is to be taxed in the subsequent assessment years i.e. 2011- 12 and the entire information was placed before the AO. AO did not make out a case of furnishing inaccurate particulars or concealment of income and the CIT(A) relied on the decision of Reliance Petro Chemicals, wherein, Hon’ble Supreme Court held that merely because, the assessee had claimed the expenditure, the claim was acceptable or not acceptable to the revenue that by itself would not in our opinion attract the penalty 271(1)(c) of the Act. As relying on the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Metal Rolling Works Limited Vs. CIT [2011 (10) TMI 29 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT], wherein held that once the receipt is disclosed, the assessee cannot be said to have concealed the particulars of income In the instant case, it is undisputed fact that the Hon’ble High Court has admitted the appeal of the assessee with regard to quantum and the entire information is furnished by the assessee in the return of income. In view of the foregoing facts and circumstances of the case , we hold that in the instant case, the assessee has neither concealed the income nor furnished the inaccurate particulars of income, hence, there is no case for penalty u/s 271(1)(c). - Decided in favour of assessee
|