Contact us   Feedback   Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (10) TMI 541 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

2015 (10) TMI 541 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT - TMI - Penalty under Section 271(1)(c) - whether income of ₹ 40 lakhs in the return of income filed for Assessment year 2001-02 was due to inadvertence/mistake? - Held that:- No particulars of how and why the mistake occurred are forthcoming. Moreover, the appellant assessee had alongwith his original return of income, not paid the full tax attributable to amount of ₹ 40 lakhs. However, alongwith the revised return of income, the assessee paid t .....

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 the appellant not honouring the statement made by him under Section 132(4) of the Act. This was on account of not having disclosed the same in the return of income filed only consequent to notice under Section 153A of the Act. We find that all the Authorities have concurrently come to the finding of fact that non disclosure of additional income of ₹ 40 lakhs in the return of income as originally filed consequent to notice under Section 153A of the Act was not bonafide. Penalty confirmed .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

has upheld the imposition of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (CIT(A)). 2. The basic issue raised by the appellant is that in the present facts, the Tribunal ought to have set aside the imposition of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act as the non disclosure of additional income of ₹ 40 lakhs in the return of income filed for Assessment year 2001-02 was due to inadvertence/mistake. The mistak .....

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 Act, the appellant-assessee has filed on 14 August 2007 its return of income for the subject Assessment year. However, in its return of income as filed, the appellant failed to disclose the additional income of ₹ 40 lakhs which had been disclosed during the search and seizure proceedings. Moreover, the tax payable on the above undisclosed amount was not paid while filing original return of income. Thus, during the course of the assessment proceedings, the Assessing officer confronted th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

osure of additional income of ₹ 40 lakhs in the return of income "remained to be included". The Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the explanation offered by the appellant inasmuch the amount of ₹ 40 lakhs being the additional income was not disclosed in the return of income originally filed in compliance to notice under Section 153A of the Act. The revised return of income disclosing the aforesaid amount was filed only after the Assessing Officer brought the non-disc .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tion 153A of the Act was not bonafide. This was for the reason that the same was only offered to tax on the assessee being confronted with the non disclosure of income in the return of income, during the course of assessment proceedings. On further appeal, the Tribunal by the impugned order has upheld the finding of the CIT (A). The impugned order renders a finding of fact that the disclosure of ₹ 40 lakhs as income in the revised Return of Income was after the Assessing Officer discovered .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| 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