TMI Blog2013 (2) TMI 220X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e. - held that:- The admitted position is that the amount of Rs.30,63,310/- was shown by her in the return. That being the position, it cannot be said that there was any concealment. There is no dispute about the fact that the amount was correctly mentioned and therefore, there is also nothing inaccurate in the particulars furnished by her. The only error that seems to have been committed was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... affairs wherein she disclosed that she had received Rs.30,63,310/- as awards from the Government and from other institutions. This amount was not offered to tax although it was disclosed in the statement of affairs along with the return. 3. The Assessing Officer processed the return under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act,1961 (for short the Act ) and accepted the return of income. 4. Late ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... further appeal, the Tribunal was of the view that the assessee had not acted in a mala fide manner and it could not be said that her actions were deliberate. It was in fact a bona fide mistake made on her behalf by her Advocate/Chartered Accountant and there was no concealment of income by her nor was there a furnishing of inaccurate particulars. The amount had been clearly mentioned in the statem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... only error that seems to have been committed was that it was not shown as a capital receipt. But as soon as this was pointed out, the error was accepted and the amount was surrendered to tax. 9. In our opinion this is not a fit case for imposition of penalty. 10. No substantial question of law arises for consideration. 11. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. 12. The miscellaneous applicat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
