TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 141X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Decided against Revenue. - Income Tax Appeal No. - 550 of 2009 - - - Dated:- 19-12-2012 - Hon'ble R.K. Agrawal And Hon'ble Ram Surat Ram (Maurya),JJ. For the Petitioner : A. N. Mahajan/S.C. ORDER The present appeal has been filed under Section 260 (A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') against the order dated 23.4.2009 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Agra (hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal'). The Commissioner of Income Tax, Agra has proposed the following substantial question of law said to be arising out of the order of the Tribunal: - "(1) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in law in deleting the penalty of Rs. 3,35,853/- levied ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t is being received through account payee draft/cheque, I am ready to pay tax on the net sale consideration (Sale-cost) as normal income instead of taking benefits of long term capital gain just to purchase peace of mind and undue pressure from the income tax department. The above declaration is subject to non issuance of any penalty notice of concealment and non levy of any penalty u/s 271(1)(c) and non initiation of prosecution proceedings." The assessee paid tax of Rs. 3 lakhs on 8.9.2004 against due tax of Rs. 2,96,852/-. In order to regularize payment of tax, the Assessing Officer issued a notice u/s 148 of the Act on 24.3.2005 calling upon the assessee to file a return of income. Pursuant to the said notice, the assessee filed ret ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... voluntary and having also offered the same in the return filed in response to notice under section 148, the action of assessee is bona-fide so as to absolve him from levy of penalty. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Suresh Chand Mittal (supra) is extracted herein: "The assessee had originally filed returns showing meager income. When after action under section 142 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, a notice under section 148 was served on him, he filed revised returns showing higher income. Eventually, assessment orders were passed ad the returns submitted regularized under section 148. In penalty proceedings under section 271, the assessee claimed that he had offered additional income to buy peace of mind and avoid litigation. Pena ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Act, penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act has rightly been levied as the assessee had concealed the particulars of his income in the original return. We may mention here that even though in the original return, claim of long term capital gain was made, yet the assessee much prior to the notice issued u/s 148 of the Act had surrendered the amount of such long term capital gain and paid tax amounting to Rs. 3 lakhs voluntarily. That being the position, we are of the considered opinion that the conduct of the assessee was bonafide and therefore, there was no concealment of the particulars of income which may cause levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. The order of the Tribunal does not suffer from any legal infirmity. The appeal fai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
