Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Krishi Utpanna Bazar Samittee (Agricultural Produce Market Committee) Versus DCIT, Circle-2, Jalgaon

Levy of Penalty u/s.271(1)(c) - assessee has furnished return of income only after issuance of notice u/s.148 - While computing the long term capital gain the AO computed the market value of one of the land at ₹ 1,15,50,000/- by applying provisions of section 50C as against the value declared by the assessee at ₹ 91 lakhs - Held that:- For the purpose of invoking the provisions of Explanation 3 to section 271(1) the conditions enumerated are cumulative. The AO having issued a notice .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

11 (5) TMI 641 - Gujarat High Court]

Even otherwise also we find the Pune Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Agricultural Produce Market Committee (2015 (6) TMI 347 - ITAT PUNE while deciding an identical issue had cancelled the penalty levied by the AO u/s.271(1)(c) holding the Explanation 3 below Sec. 271(1)(c) which is deeming provision, is applicable to the assessee as period mentioned u/s. 153(1) has expired and then only the assessee filed the returns of income but at the same .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ome for both the assessment years. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No. 2238/PN/2013 - Dated:- 20-5-2015 - Ms. Sushma Chowla, JM And R. K. Panda, AM,JJ. For the Appellant : Shri Sunil Ganoo For the Respondent : Shri Mazar Akram ORDER Per R K Panda, AM. This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 10-10-2013 of the CIT(A)-II, Nashik relating to Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. Levy of Penalty of ₹ 58,35,106/- u/s.271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 by the AO and confir .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ed that the assessee APMC had sold non-agricultural land at Survey No.231 admeasuring 1 Hectare 34R for a consideration of ₹ 91 lakhs to Shri Liladhar Madhukar Patil, Pachora. However, as per sale deed the market price of the property was ₹ 1,15,50,000/-. It was further noted by the AO that the assessee had sold non agricultural land to Shri Atul Sanghavi, Pachora for a consideration of ₹ 15,51,000/-. During the course of assessment proceedings the AO asked the assessee to show .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tal gain at ₹ 99,45,876/-. 4. The assessee challenged the additions made by the AO determining the long term capital gain at ₹ 99,49,876/- before CIT(A). The Ld.CIT(A) while upholding the action of the AO in adopting the valuation as determined by the stamp duty valuation directed the AO to allow further cost of ₹ 25,00,000/- being enhanced compensation paid to the owner as per court order for the purpose of indexation. The AO thereafter initiated penalty proceedings u/s.271(1) .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

enalty notice, nothing was mentioned regarding the applicability of either main clause of section 271(1)(c) or Explanation 3 to section 271(1)(c). The assessee relied upon various case laws in support of its contention. 5. However, the AO was not satisfied with the explanation given by the assessee. He observed that as regard to the first contention it can be seen from the records that assessee ought to have offered for taxation the capital gain by adopting stamp duty valuation of the property f .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

as per provisions of section 139(1) assessee should have filed return within the stipulated time to which assessee failed. The decisions quoted by the assessee are not squarely applicable to assessee's case. Rejecting the various explanations given by the assessee and distinguishing various decisions cited before him the AO levied penalty of ₹ 58,35,106/- u/s.271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act. 6. Before CIT(A) the assessee vehemently opposed the levy of penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act. I .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ed by the department, to come out from the financial problems/crisis. It was further submitted that the assessee APMC is maintaining regular books of accounts, which are duly audited by the Special Auditor, Class-I, of Co-operative Department of Jalgaon. The co5 operative audit was not completed by the due date of filing of return of income and hence the then C.A was reluctant to audit the books of account and hence, the assessee was not provided with reports in the forms as per section 44AB of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

y shows that heavy loan was outstanding during this period against the assessee. 8. It was submitted that the assessee APMC has approached their then counsel for preparation of computation of income for filing return of income and came to know that it required to make the payment of self assessment tax of about ₹ 59.82 lakhs. Sufficient funds were not available with the assessee for making the payment of Self-Assessment tax and it was told to the assessee that unless payment of Self-Assess .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

f income : Date of S.A. payment Amount (Rs.) 28-02-2011 5,00,000 25-03-2011 5,00,000 25-03-2011 5,00,000 25-03-2011 5,00,000 31-03-2011 5,00,000 31-03-2011 5,00,000 31-03-2011 5,00,000 31-03-2011 5,00,000 31-03-2011 5,00,000 31-03-2011 5,00,000 31-03-2011 5,00,000 31-03-2011 5,00,000 Total 60,00,000 9. The assessee further submitted that even after receipt of notice under section 148 it had tried its best to collect the amount for payment of taxes but ultimately it failed to do so due to paucity .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ty of the funds amounts to reasonable cause, the assessee relied upon the decision in the case of Mahadeobari Tea Co. (P) Ltd. V/s. Dy. CIT reported in (2002) 75 TTJ 561 (Gau). 10. It was submitted that the AO has not properly appreciated the entire facts of the case and also reasons by which assessee was prevented for late filing the return of income. AO has not considered entire submissions of the assessee and merely brushed aside various facts stating, that, "reasonable cause of paucity .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ecause the addition is confirmed by the first appellate authority, penalty cannot be levied automatically. For this proposition, the assessee also relied on the following decisions : 1. CIT Vs. Aarkay Saree Musuem reported in 187 ITR 147 (Bom.) 2. CIT Vs. Parmeshwari Das Satpal Barnala reported in (2008) 14 Taxmann 507 (P&H) 3. Gem Granites Vs. DY.CIT reported in (2009) 120 TTJ 992 (Chennai) 4. CIT Vs. Khoday Eswarsa & Sons reported in (1972) CTR 295 (SC) It was accordingly submitted tha .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

gains from sale of the said properties without considering the provisions of section 50C of the I.T. Act. Eventhough the assessee was fully aware that in assessee's case section 50C of the I.T Act was/is attracted, the assessee had deliberately made a wrong claim. Only when enquiries were conducted by the Department, the wrong claim was discovered. Distinguishing the various decisions cited before him, the Ld.CIT(A) held that it is not a case where the assessee had filed its return of income .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

AO completed the assessment determining the total income at ₹ 2,27,19,504/- wherein he made addition of ₹ 79,49,876/- on account of long term capital gain. While doing so the AO has considered the sale value of agricultural land at Survey No.231 sold to Shri Liladhar Madhukar Patil at ₹ 1,15,50,000/- as against ₹ 91 lakhs received by the assessee by applying provisions of section 50C of the I.T. At. He submitted that in appeal the Ld.CIT(A) has allowed further deduction o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

er of the ITAT, Pune the Ld. Counsel for the assessee drew the attention of the Bench to the determination of income by the AO at ₹ 1,61,07,873/- as against the returned income of ₹ 2,02,69,504/- in the return of income filed in response to notice u/s.148. He submitted that in the penalty proceedings despite submissions made by the assessee regarding the sequence of events that has taken place the AO levied penalty of ₹ 58,35,106/- u/s.271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act which has been u .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e same has been levied by following the provisions of Explanation 3 to section 271(1)(c) of the I.T.Act. He submitted that the notice u/s.148 in the instant case was issued within a period of 2 years from the end of the relevant assessment year. Since the assessment year involved in the instant case is A.Y. 2008-09 the two year period expires on 31-03-2011 and the AO has issued the notice u/s.148 on 24-12-2010. Referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Chhaga .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ld have failed without reasonable cause to furnish return of income for A.Y. 1989-90 or any year subsequent thereto within 2 years from the end of the assessment year concerned (c) no notice should have been issued to him u/s.142(1) or section 148 of the Act before expiry of the 2 year period and (d) the concerned officer is satisfied that in respect of such assessment year such person had taxable income. In such cases Explanation 3 provides that such person shall be deemed to have concealed the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n 271. Hence, unless Explanation 3 of section 271(1) is attracted, there can be no concealment as envisaged u/s.271(1)(c). Further, the conditions for the applicability of Explanation 3 to section 271(1) are cumulative and each of the conditions has to be established for the purpose of invoking the provisions. Since in that case the notice was issued to the petitioner assessee u/s.148 of the Act on 10-03-1997 which was within the period specified u/s.153(1) it was held that the case of the petit .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he I.T. Act cannot be levied in view of the Explanation 3 to provisions of section 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act. 18. Even on merit the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that even after amendment of section 10(20) the APMC's continued to be local authorities and there were wide spread misunderstanding. Only after the Hon'ble Supreme Court clarified about the definition of local authority that it was felt necessary to file the return of income from A.Y. 2009-10 onwards. Provisions of sec .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

. 19. Referring to the decision of the Pune Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Jalgaon vide ITA Nos. 2019 to 2025/PN/2013 order dated 21- 10-2014 for A.Y. 2007-08 and 2008-09 he submitted that under identical facts and circumstances the Tribunal cancelled the penalty levied by the AO u/s.271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act and upheld by the CIT(A). He submitted that in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court and the decision of the Pune Bench of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

en no notice u/s.148 the assessee would not have filed the return of income. Therefore, under the facts and circumstances of the case levy of penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act was justified which has been rightly upheld by the CIT(A). 21. We have considered the rival arguments made by both the sides, perused the orders of the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A) and the Paper Book filed on behalf of the assessee. We have also considered the various decisions cited before us. The assessee in the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the land at ₹ 1,15,50,000/- by applying provisions of section 50C as against the value declared by the assessee at ₹ 91 lakhs. In appeal the Ld.CIT(A) while upholding the adoption of provisions of section 50C allowed further relief of ₹ 25 lakhs being enhanced compensation paid to the owner of the land as part of the cost of acquisition. On further appeal by the assessee as well as the revenue the Tribunal vide order dated 20-03-2014 set aside the order of the CIT(A) wherein h .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

₹ 1,61,07,873/- as against the returned income of ₹ 2,02,69,504/-. Under these circumstances, now we have to decide the leviability of penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act which has been levied by the AO at ₹ 58,35,106/- and upheld by the CIT(A). 22. It is the submission of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that where the notice u/s.148 of the I.T Act has been issued before the completion of 2 years from the end of the relevant assessment year, penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the I. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

cordingly filed the return of income. Therefore, in view of the decision of the Pune Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Jalgaon (Supra) penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act is not leviable. 23. We find some force in the above arguments of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee. The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Chhaganlal Suteriya (Supra) has held that for the purpose of invoking the provisions of Explanation 3 to section 271(1) the conditions enume .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of the I.T. Act. The relevant observation of the Hon'ble High Court at pages 356 and 357 read as under : "11. Thus, the legal position that emerges is that mere failure to furnish a return of income does not tantamount to concealment under s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. In the circumstances, the contention raised on behalf of the Revenue that non-filing of the return of income per se amounts to concealment within the meaning of s. 271(1)(c) of the Act, being contrary to the settled legal posi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

income and penalty will be leviable on him accordingly if he is later found to have had taxable income in that year. Thus, for the purpose of falling within the purview of Expln. 3, firstly, a person should not have been previously assessed (that is, a new assessee); secondly, he should have failed without reasonable cause, to furnish return of income for asst. yr. 1989-90 or any year subsequent thereto within two years from the end of the assessment year concerned; thirdly, that no notice shou .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ry of the said period of two years in pursuance of a notice under s. 148 of the Act, the deeming provision of Expln. 3 shall still have application. 13. Though it has been contended on behalf of the respondents that in the present case Expln. 3 has not been applied; as noticed earlier mere non-furnishing of a return per se is not tantamount to concealment within the meaning of s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. The only eventuality under which nonfurnishing of return of income amounts to concealment is as .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of the said conditions is not satisfied, the provisions of Expln. 3 to s. 271(1) of the Act would not be applicable. 14. In the present case admittedly the petitioner had not been previously assessed under the provisions of the Act, hence, the first requirement of Expln. 3 is duly satisfied. The petitioner had not filed his return of income within the period specified under sub-s. (1) of s. 153 of the Act and as such, the second condition is also satisfied. However, as noted earlier, in the pre .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ns has to be established for the purpose of invoking the said provision. In the present case, all the conditions are not cumulatively satisfied. The failure on the part of the petitioner to furnish return of income within the specified period, therefore, cannot be deemed to be concealment within the meaning of the Expln. 3 to s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. 15. In the light of the aforesaid, it is apparent that the case of the petitioner does not fall within the ambit of Expln. 3 to s. 271(1) of the Ac .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ue had cancelled the penalty levied by the AO u/s.271(1)(c) of the I.T Act and upheld by the CIT(A) by observing as under : "5. In this case it is not in dispute that the assessee was treated as a local authority u/s. 10(20) of the Income-tax Act up to the A.Y. 2002-03. Subsequently, there was an amendment to section 10(2) of the Income-tax Act and the APMC was removed from the definition of the local authority. It is pertinent to note that the Finance Act, 2008 has introduced Sub-sec. (26A .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     Latest Happenings     ↓  

Highlight: The interest u/s 234B of the Act cannot go beyond the stage of S.245D(I) before the Settlement Commission - HC

Highlight: Galvanized iron pipe is a different commercial commodity than a iron pipe, therefore the activity of galvanization in our considered opinion amounts to manufacture - Deduction u/s 80-IB allowed - HC

Highlight: Penalty u/s 271C - non deduction of TDS on interest paid to sister concerns in terms of Section 194A - Levy of penalty confirmed - HC

Highlight: Disallowance of interest - reference to section 179 - The legislature has also recognised, that the doctrine of lifting of veil in the matter of tax dues is to be applied to prevent fraud etc. and not where the company has suffered despite its normal bona fide function. - HC

News: RBI Reference Rate for US $

Notification: Amendment in Notification No. S.O. 3118(E), dated the 3rd October, 2016

Highlight: Discount on ESOP to be allowed as business expenditure u/s 37(1), during the years of vesting on the basis of percentage of vesting during such period, subject to upward or downward adjustment at the time of exercise of option.

Notification: Central Government appoints the 20th September, 2017 as the date on which proviso to clause (87) of section 2 of the Companies Act 2013, shall come into force

Notification: Companies (Restriction on number of layers) Rules, 2017

Highlight: Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - additional income disclosure - surrender of income post survey u/s 133A - he disclosure made by the assessee is voluntary in nature, in the revised return - no penalty

Highlight: Reopening of assessment - notice u/s 148 issued on the directions of JCIT / CIT - a perusal of reasons for initiating reassessment proceedings clearly show that they are against the sprit of provisions u/s 147

Notification: All Industry Rates of Duty Drawback Schedule

Highlight: MAT - Adjustment to book profit - computation u/clause (f) of Explanation-1 to section 115JB(2) is to be made without resorting to the computation as contemplated u/s 14A r.w.Rule 8D of I.T. Rules.

Notification: The Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 2017

Highlight: Addition on account of alleged suppression of service value received - the addition made simply believing the Form 26AS will be an arbitrary exercise of power which cannot be sustained

Notification: Exempts intra state supply of heavy water and nuclear fuels from DAE to NPCIL

Notification: Seeks to amend notification No. 12/2017-UTT(R) to exempt right to admission to the events organised under FIFA U-17 World Cup 2017

Notification: Seeks to amend notification No. 11/2017- UTT(R) to reduce CGST rate on specified supplies of Works Contract Services

Highlight: Liability to pay duty on import of software - Though no authorization was given by the appellant to DHL, it is an undisputed position that the software has, in fact, been ordered by the appellant and have been delivered to them by DHL - the appellant is to be considered as the importer

Notification: Exempts inter-state supply of heavy water and nuclear fuels from DAE to NPCIL

Notification: Seeks to amend notification No. 09/2017-IT(R) to exempt right to admission to the events organised under FIFA U-17 World Cup 2017

Notification: Seeks to amend notification No. 08/2017-IT(R) to reduce CGST rate on specified supplies of Works Contract Services

Notification: Exempts intra state supply of heavy water and nuclear fuels from DAE to NPCIL

Notification: Seeks to amend notification No. 12/2017-CT(R) to exempt right to admission to the events organised under FIFA U-17 World Cup 2017

Notification: Seeks to amend notification No. 11/2017-CT(R) to reduce CGST rate on specified supplies of Works Contract Services.

News: Tax on fuel more important for a dry state like Gujarat

Highlight: For an ayurvedic medicine to be classified under Chapter 30 has to pass the test whether it is for cure of any disease. If the same is only meant for care, then such product would not fall under medicament.

Highlight: Demand of interest - the period of limitation that applies to a claim for the principal amount should also apply to the claim of interest thereon.

Highlight: Government issues new notifications under CGST, IGST and UTGST to grant fresh exemptions in respect of certain supplies.

Circular: Extension of time limit for submitting the declaration in FORM GST TRAN-1 under rule 117 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017

Forum: 3B mistake

Forum: Excise duty credit on finished stock at additional place of business.

Forum: Input tax credit

Forum: Cess paid instead of SGST

Forum: Manpower Service provider

Forum: Construction of single unit bungalow

Forum: Duty Drawback & Input Credit - under GST

Article: SIMPLIFIED E-WAY BILL UNDER GST

Article: SERVICES UNDER REVERSE CHARGE UNDER GST REGIME

Highlight: Rate of exchange of conversion of the foreign currency with effect from 22th September, 2017 - Notification

Highlight: Companies (Acceptance of Deposits) Second Amendment Rules, 2017 - Notification

Highlight: Implementing Electronic Sealing for containers by exporters under self-sealing procedure prescribed by Circular 26/2017-Cus dated 1st July, 2017 and Circular 36/2017 dated 28 th August, 2017. reg. - Circular

Highlight: Amendment to Paragraph 2.72 (b) of the Handbook of Procedures of the Foreign Trade Policy (FTP) 2015-20 - Public Notice

Notification: Amendment in Appendix 3 (SCOMET items) to Schedule- 2 of ITC (HS) Classification of Export and Import Items 2012

Circular: Amendment to Paragraph 2.72 (b) of the Handbook of Procedures of the Foreign Trade Policy (FTP) 2015-20

Notification: Companies (Acceptance of Deposits) Second Amendment Rules, 2017

Notification: Rate of exchange of conversion of the foreign currency with effect from 22th September, 2017

News: Exchange Rate of Foreign Currency Relating To Imported and Export Goods Notified

Circular: Promote the officers of the Indian Revenue Service (Customs and Central Excise) to the grade of Principal commissioner of customs, GST & CX

Circular: Allocate the charges amongst the Members of the Central Board of Excise and Customs



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version