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 →

The Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle-2, Jaipur Versus Shri Jugal Kishore Garg

2015 (10) TMI 1715 - ITAT JAIPUR

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - furnishing inaccurate particulars and concealed the income - CIT(A) deleted the penalty - Held that:- The Tribunal in quantum matters in the case of the assessee [2015 (10) TMI 1743 - ITAT JAIPUR] has allowed the appeal of the assessee by deleting the addition. Since the addition made by the AO, no longer survives, no penalty is leviable on the assessee u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. The ld. CIT (A) also deleted the penalty imposed @ 200% of tax sought to be evaded 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

07.10.2013 for the A.Y. 2006-07. The grounds raised in the appeal are as under :- 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case ld. CIT (Appeals)(C), Jaipur has erred in deleting the penalty of ₹ 10,94,116/- imposed by the AO u/s 271(1)(c) as there was sufficient circumstantial evidence to prove that the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of the transfer of property through colourable device and had concealed his true taxable income. 2. On the facts and in the circumstanc .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s viz. Shop No. 232 & 233 at Ganpati Plaza, Jaipur by way of transfer of share holding and declared capital gain of ₹ 50,205/- and ₹ 31,033/-. The assessee determined capital gain on the basis of share capital and indexed cost thereof. The AO took the deemed selling price of ₹ 44,38,280/- (Rs. 26,04,280/- + ₹ 18,34,000/-) after reducing unsecured loans against the said properties then determined deeming selling price per share after reducing indexed cost of shares cal .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

in concealment of income. The AO gave show cause notice on 25.05.2011 to the assessee before imposing penalty under section 271(1)(c) as the addition has been confirmed by the ld. CIT (A). The assessee also replied before the AO which has been reproduced by the AO at page 3 of the penalty order. The submissions made by the assessee have been considered but found legally untenable. All the objections raised by the assessee has already been dealt by the ld. CIT (A) and elaborately discussing 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

eing aggrieved by the order of the AO, assessee carried the matter before ld. CIT (A), who had allowed the appeal and deleted the penalty by observing as under :- 4.4. I have carefully perused the quantum order, penalty order and the submissions of the AR and concur with the submissions of the AR on the following grounds : i) The facts of the case are that the appellant was a share holder of the company Unique Propcon Pvt. Ltd. Out of the 10000 shares the appellant was holding 6000 shares and 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

capital gain in the hands of the assessee at ₹ 24,08,460/-. iii) The matter came up for adjudication before Hon. ITAT in the case of other share holder namely Smt. Jaimala Agarwal. Hon. ITAT by its order ITA No. 465/JP/2011 for A.Y. 2006-07 gave a finding in favour of the assessee by its order dated 2.2.2012. The Hon. ITAT granted relief in the case of Jaimala Agarwal vide its order supra while making the following observations : 4. After considering the orders of the authorities below an .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

that person any capital gain can be assessed on the basis of land or office sold by the company. If any addition can be made that can be made on the basis of value of those shares or taking into consideration that the sale consideration shown by assessee is not correct, if there is any evidence. No such material was there before the AO that assessee has sold the share below market price and, therefore, in our considered view the basis on which the addition has been made by AO was not correct an .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

C with reference of transfer of property from one company to other was required to be made in the hands of the company rather than the individual share holders. v) The balance sheets of the company was called for and presented by the appellant for A.Ys. 2005-06 and 2006-07. On perusal of these balance sheets it is seen that the company Unique Propcon Pvt. Ltd. had been showing this property as its asset in the balance sheet. Therefore, the addition u/s 50C in the hands of the company or the shar .....

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
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| 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