TMI Blog2013 (6) TMI 101X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of assessee. - ITA 279/2013 - - - Dated:- 31-5-2013 - Badar Durrez Ahmed And Vibhu Bakhru,JJ. For the Appellant :Mr Kiran Babu For the Respondent :Mr Salil Aggarwal with Mr Ravi Pratap Mall JUDGMENT Vibhu Bakhru, J. 1. This is an appeal filed on behalf of the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act"). The appellant herein has challenged the order dated 20.07.2012 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in ITA No. 215/Del/2012 for the assessment year 2008-09. The controversy in the present case relates to levy of penalty by the Assessing Officer under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. 2. The assessee filed a return under the Act for the assessment year 2008- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ice at which the options were granted and the expenses for sale of shares, the balance proceeds were remitted to the assessee. 4. The return filed by the assessee was taken up for scrutiny and the Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 86,98,461/- to the income of the assessee on account of short term capital gains. The said addition was made by the Assessing Officer as he held that the gains arising out of exercising of options and sale of the shares of Citi Bank were not long term capital gains but short term capital gains inasmuch as shares were sold on the very same day on which the assessee exercised her ESOP. The date of grant of ESOP was not considered by the Assessing Officer as the date of acquisition of the capital asset sold ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en invested in acquiring a residential house. 7. It was contended on behalf of the assessee that making a wrong claim would not be a ground for imposing penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act as the same did not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars or concealment of income as the assessee had disclosed all material facts and had claimed exemption under section 54F of the Act based on legal advice that gains from exercise of options would not be taxed. The CIT (Appeals) accepted the contentions of the assessee and set aside the order of penalty dated 29.06.2011. 8. The revenue preferred an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal relying on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
