TMI Blog2014 (3) TMI 616X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... followed - if amount in question, which forms the basis for the AO to levy penalty, is truthfully reported in the returns and the AO chooses to treat the income under some other head them it cannot be held that the assessee has filed inaccurate particulars or has suppressed the facts - by claiming rental income as business income cannot be held to be furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income - the order of the FAA reversed – Decided in favour of Assessee. - ITA No. 7413/Mum/2012 - - - Dated:- 14-3-2014 - Sh. Rajendra And Sanjay Garg, JJ. For the Petitioner : Shri M. V. Subramanian For the Respondent : Shri Sanjeev Jain ORDER Per Rajendra, AM Challenging the order dt. 16. 10. 2012 of the CIT(A)-10, Mumbai, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issued by him, requiring the assessee to show cause as to why penalty should not levied for furnishing inaccurate particulars and concealment of income. In the appellate proceedings, First Appellate Authority(FAA)allowed the appeal filed by the assessee, but Tribunal reversed his order. AO, as stated earlier had issued notice for levying penalty and vide his order dated 30. 10. 2009, he levied penalty of Rs. 4. 40 lakhs, u/s. 271(1)(c)of the Act. 3. During the course of appeal proceedings before the FAA, assessee submitted that there was no concealment of income, that the rental income was fully disclosed in the P L a/c. , that he had merely made a legal income by offering it to tax as business income whereas the AO had taxed the same as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ar under appeal income from the premises rented out was assessed under the head income from business, that in the subsequent years AO had accepted the claim made by the assessee to treat it as business income, that the said income was not assessee as income form house property while AO had passed assessment order u/s. 143(3) of the Act, that Hon ble High Court had admitted the appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Tribunal. He relied upon the judgments of Reliance Petroproduct(supra), Advaita Estate Development P Ltd. (27ITR112-Trib), Shailseh P Patel(33tax mannn. com. 51-Ahd), Amit Jain(351ITR74), Mahaveer Irrigation Pvt. Ltd. (347ITR241). Departme - ntal Representative(DR) submitted that the assessee had not disclosed the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ount in question, which forms the basis for the AO to levy penalty, is truthfully reported in the returns and the AO chooses to treat the income under some other head them it cannot be held that the assessee has filed inaccurate particulars or has suppressed the facts. While deciding the matter Hon ble Delhi High Court had relied upon the judgment of Reliance Petroproducts. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case we are of the opinion that by claiming rental income as business income cannot be held to be furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. Therefore, reversing the order of the FAA, we decide effective ground of appeal in favour of the assessee. As a result, appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed. Order pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
