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 →

Rita Chopra Versus ACIT, Circle 33 (1) , New Delhi.

Levying penalty u/s 271(1 )(c) - addition u/s 2(22)(e) - Held that:- In the present case, the alleged amount was given from M/s Beacon Logicwares Pvt. Ltd. to SRVR Software Solutions Pvt. Ltd. and the assessee was neither the recipient nor the payer of the money and since there was no receipt of payment of the money by the assessee, the conscious act of furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income or concealment of income cannot be attributed to the assessee, specially when the addition u/s 2( .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rs of her income which attracts penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. Accordingly, main ground of the assessee is allowed and the Assessing Officer is directed to delete the penalty. - Decided in favour of assessee - I.T.A. No.6815/DEL/2013 - Dated:- 23-10-2015 - SHRI J. S. REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI C. M. GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER For The Appellant : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. Shri Somil Agarwal For The Respondent by Sh. Amarjeet Singh, Sr. DR ORDER PER CHANDRAMOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER This appeal .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

,50,000/- u/s 271(1 )(c) and that too without assuming jurisdiction as per law and without appreciating the facts and circumstances of the case 2. Brief facts as noted by the CIT(A) read as under:- 2. The brief facts of the case relevant for deciding this appeal is that the appellant's assessment for the relevant AY was completed u/s 143(3) on income of ₹ 54,42,550/- as against the returned income of ₹ 9,42,550/-. The appellant, as one of the partners, derives income from the par .....

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 given loan and advance of ₹ 45,00,000/- to M/s SKVR, therefore, she issued a so-cause notice to the appellant that why not the sum of ₹ 45,00,000/- should be charged to tax u/s 2(22)(e) in the hands of the appellant. In response to the socause notice, the appellant tried to explain that the loan and advance of ₹ 000/- given by M/s BLPL to M/s SKVR was actually share application money and therefore, the provisions of section 2(22)(e) are not attracted. However, the explanation .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

um of ₹ 45,00,000/- charged to tax u/s 2(22)(e) by the AO were concluded vide impugned order 3. Finally, the Assessing Officer passed penalty order u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short the Act) on 30.3.12 and imposed penalty of ₹ 13,50,000 by holding that he is satisfied that the assessee has concealed the income and furnished inaccurate particulars of income and it is a fit case for levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act r/w Explanation 1. The aggrieved assessee pr .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Brij Mohan vs CIT 120 ITR 01(S.C.), if there is any change in law operating at the time of assessment proceedings, then the law applicable and operating on the date when return was filed has to be considered while dealing with the issue of imposition of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. Learned counsel of the assessee further submitted that in view of decision of ITAT Mumbai in the case of West Coast Industries vs ACIT in I.T.A. No. 1566/Mumb .....

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 state of law as it existed at the time of filing the return. 4. The second proposition placed by the learned counsel of the assessee is that for attracting provisions of section 2(22)(e) of the Act, there has to be a payment of loans or advance and that too out of accumulated profits. Ld. Counsel further pointed out that in the given case, the amount was paid by M/s Beacon Logicwares Pvt. Ltd. to M/s SRVR Software Solutions Pvt. Ltd. and assessee was nowhere involved in the said transaction, .....

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 deemed dividend. Learned counsel of the assessee pointed out that merely because addition has been confirmed, levy of penalty is unjustified and bad in law. Reliance has been placed on the decision of ITAT Mumbai in the case of Sunilchandra Vohra vs ACIT reported in 127 TTJ 100(Mumbai). 5. The third and last submission of the assessee is that deeming dividend is a fiction created by law and the same is not acceptable to levy penalty so as to raise a presumption about concealment of income 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

ified. 7. On careful consideration of above submissions of both the sides, from the penalty order, we note that the Assessing Officer levied impugned penalty on the assessee with following observations and conclusion:- The amounts of ₹ 44,00,000/- during F. Y. 2005-06 and ₹ 45,00,000/- during F. Y. 2006-07 have been extended by M/s Beacon Logic Waves to M/s SKVR as unsecured loans which has been deliberately disguised as share application money so as to avoid the application of Secti .....

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, where is the possibility of any other entity being allotted 8,90,000 shares a fact which was fully in the knowledge of Suit. Rita Chopra in her dual capacity as director of both companies. In view of the above undersigned is satisfied that the assessee has concealed the income and furnished inaccurate particulars of income and it is fit case for levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) read with explanation 1 to section 271(1). 8. From above observations of the Assessing Officer in the penalty order, 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

on was held between two companies wherein the assessee was a director of both the companies. Before the Assessing Officer, the assessee submitted vide submission dated 22.12.09 wherein she explained that the share application money deposited by one company is neither a loan nor advance and more so, since both the companies have their individual identities, PANs, registration number issued by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, Govt. Of India. A corporate entity is an artificial person created by .....

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 the minutes of the investee company i.e. M/s Beacon Logicwares Pvt. Ltd. for investment in share application money is further clear from Annexure C. Before the CIT(A) it was also accepted that the entire impugned alleged transaction of share application money was well explained with evidence during assessment proceedings, then how any question of concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income arises, especially when the assessee was not recipient of money from M/s Beacon Logicwa .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ent of income . 10. At this juncture, we respectfully take cognizance of the decision of ITAT Mumbai in the case of West Coast Industries vs ACIT (supra) wherein in the similar set of acts and circumstances, it was held thus:- Thus, there is no doubt that there could have been two opinions regarding taxability of deemed dividend vis-a-vis a firm i.e. whether to be done in the hands of the firm or to be done in the hands of the partners of the firm. In this case, there is no doubt that the shares .....

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 was any concealment of any particulars of it's income. Neither can it be said that assessee had furnished any inaccurate particulars of income. As regards contention of the Learned DR that assessee had not offered any explanation before the Ld. CIT(A) or the AO we find from the penalty order that assessee had vide it's letter dt. 03.04.2004 given explanations vis-a-vis the deemed dividend. However, Learned AO had proceeded to levy the penalty based on the Tribunal order upholding the a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ase of concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars. Just because an assessee could not offer explanation referring to the concerned case laws in an exact manner, it would not make any significant difference in the state of law as it existed at the time of filing the return. Therefore, in our opinion, this was not a fit case for levy of penalty, and the penalty which was levied on a mere addition would not stand. In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed. 11. We further take cogni .....

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 provisions of section 2(22)(e) of the Act was held to be a reasonable cause for deleting penalty. The relevant operative part of the judgment of ITAT Kolkata reads thus:- 4. The assessee is a Managing Director of Hi-tech Graphic Private Ltd. (HGPL) and assessee claimed in response to penalty notice that as per agreement with the HGPL, assessee is entitled to commission and in lieu of that assessee received advance of ₹ 80 lacs i.e. commission receivable on the condition that commiss .....

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 commission payable was only to the extent of ₹ 23,93,830/- in place of the total advance payable against commission at ₹ 80 lacs. The assessee explained that the net amount of ₹ 56,06,165/- stood to the credit of the company in the books of the assessee on account of advance commission payment. The assessee during the course of penalty proceedings explained that he was soliciting business for the company against which the company paid commission and in fact commission to 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

akraborty in ITA No. 98 of 2009 dated 16.07.2010 wherein following question of law was referred: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income- tax Appellate Tribunal is correct in deleting penalties of ₹ 15,05,548/- and ₹ 3,33,802/- imposed under section 271(l)(c) with reference to non-inclusion of the interest free advances of ₹ 27,50, 162/- and ₹ 11,00,000/- received as interest free advances in the period relevant to the assessment years .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

lity?" 5. Ld. counsel for the assessee stated that the jurisdictional High Court dismissed the appeal of revenue and confirmed the order of ITAT wherein it is held that in respect of addition on account of deemed dividend no penalty u/s. 271(l)(c) of the Act for concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income is warranted. Ld. counsel for the assessee also relied on the coordinate Bench decision in the case of Sunil Chandra Vohra Vs. ACIT (2009) 32 SOT 365 (Mum) wherein the ignor .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

a travesty of truth and justice to hold that an assessee ought to have known the correct law and comply therewith, even though he was not aware of the provisions. In the case of Kaushal Diwan vs. ITO (1983) 3 ITD 432 (Del) (TM), the learned AM observed, on an analogous situation, that the tax provisions are so complex that even he was not aware of the provision in question till the matter was placed before the Bench. Similar view was taken in the case of WTO vs S. P. Jayakumar (1983) 3 ITD 221 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d an explanation which was substantiated and thus the burden is cast upon the Revenue to prove that the explanation is false so as to invoke Expln. 1 to s. 271 (l)(c) of the Act. Except merely stating that the assessee ought to have furnished the loan particulars voluntarily, along with the return of income, no other reason was assigned by the tax authorities to dispute the bona fides of the explanation. Under the peculiar facts and circumstances and in the light of decisions cited by the learne .....

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: Levy of additions tax u/s 115O on distribution of dividend - shares of its profits declared as distributable among the shareholders is not impressed with the character of the profit from which it reaches the hands of the shareholder - not to be bifurcated as agriculture and non-agriculture dividend - SC

Highlight: Rate of GST on old and scrap buses - 28% or 18% - at such initial tender process initiated by the Respondents-KSRTC, the present petitions filed by the petitioners are premature and misconceived and do not require any interference by this Court at this stage. - HC

Forum: Rent a cab operator

Highlight: In view of amendment made u/s 132A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by Finance Act of 2017, the 'reason to believe' or 'reason to suspect', as the case may be, shall not be disclosed to any person or any authority or the Appellate Tribunal, SC dismissed the appeal of the assessee

Highlight: Validity of Assessment Order - period of limitation u/s 153 (2A) is applicable even if the entire order was not set aside but matter was remanded back for for limited aspects with directions - HC

News: Note ban was a shake-up, achieved its main objectives

Notification: Amendments in the notification No.5/2017- Integrated Tax (Rate) dated the 28th June, 2017.

Highlight: Levying interest u/s 234C - interest is to be charged on the returned income and not on assessed income.

Highlight: Accrual of income - sale of right to develop and sell incentive FSI under LOI - till the conditions of LOI are fulfilled transfer is not complete and income does not accrue to the assessee

Highlight: TPA - determination of ALP - TP adjustment by applying Bright Line Test (BLT) is not sustainable on protective basis having no statutory mandate.

Highlight: Safeguard Duty - Advance License Scheme - as there is no exemption from safeguard duty leviable under Section 8C, which is imposed on the goods imported from China, the importer has to pay safeguard duty

Highlight: Manufacture - process of cutting of waste plastic container - Such plastic containers before and after cutting are nothing but waste / scrap - Not a manufacturing activity as no new product emerges.

News: NITI Aayog and Govt. of Assam organizes workshop on health sector reforms in Guwahati; launches SATH- Sustainable Action for Transforming Human Capital

Notification: Seeks to amend notification no. 5/2017- central tax(rate) dated 28.06.2017 to give effect to gst council decisions regarding restriction of refund on corduroy fabrics

Notification: Seeks to amend notification no. 2/2017- central tax(rate) dated 28.06.2017 to give effect to gst council decisions regarding gst exemptions

Forum: GSTR 3B Rectification

Notification: seeks to exempt Skimmed milk powder, or concentrated milk

Notification: Seeks to amend notification no. 2/2017- integrated tax(rate) dated 28.06.2017 to give effect to GST council decisions regarding GST exemptions.

Forum: 3B mistake

Notification: Seeks to amend notification no. 1/2017- central tax(rate) dated 28.06.2017 to give effect to gst council decisions regarding gst rates

Notification: Seeks to amend notification no. 1/2017- integrated tax(rate) dated 28.06.2017 to give effect to gst council decisions regarding gst rates.

Forum: GST - TRAN1 - filed - Data uploaded with Remarks Processed with Error - Not coming in Electronic credit ledger - need suggession guidance

News: Notification Issued For GST Actionable Claim On Branded Food Products

Highlight: Classification printed computer stationary/manifold Business Forms - to be classified under Chapter Heading 4820.00 or under Chapter Heading 4901.90 - items like A4 sheets, advertisement and job card to be classified under Chapter 49

Forum: GST Invoice

Article: Websites of Government Departments need lot of improvement. We are noticing detoriations in them for example, case of website of ITAT.

Article: RCM Applicability to persons not liable to get registered us 23(1)

Article: Credit of unsold stock [Section 140(3)] - Actual Credit as well as Notional Credit - Part-I - GST Transitional provisions

News: GST Refund - Blockage of Working Capital of Exporters - earlier also there was a normal blockage of funds for a period of 5-6 months at least

News: Clarification about Transition Credit - ₹ 1.27 lakh crore of credit of Central Excise and Service Tax was lying as closing balance as on 30th June, 2017 - claim of credit of ₹ 65,000 crore is not unexpected

Article: 20 Things You must know about E Way Bills in GST Law

Article: MISTAKES IN DRAFTING

Forum: Duty Drawback- Urgent

Highlight: The Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 2017 and All Industry Rates (AIRs) of Drawback related changes -reg. - Circular

Highlight: The definition of "subsidiary company" or "subsidiary" u/s 2(87) of the Companies Act, 2013 shall come into force w.e.f. 20-9-2017

Highlight: Central Government notified the All Industry Rates of Duty Drawback Schedule w.e.f. 1.10.2017 - Notification

Notification: All Industry Rates of Duty Drawback Schedule w.e.f. 1.10.2017

Circular: Investment by Foreign Portfolio Investors in Corporate Debt Securities Review

Notification: Exemptions on supply of services under UTGST Act

Notification: Rates for supply of services under UTGST Act

Notification: Exemptions on supply of services under IGST Act

Notification: Rates for supply of services under IGST Act

Notification: List of Exempted supply of services under the CGST Act

Notification: Rates for supply of services under CGST Act

Highlight: Acceptance of deposits by companies from its members - conditions relaxed in case of Specified IFSC Public company and a private company - Rule 3 amended

Notification: Rate of exchange of conversion of the foreign currency with effect from 8th September, 2017

News: Tax Payers Advised To Confirm Identities Of Income Tax Search Authorities

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

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

Circular: The Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 2017 and All Industry Rates (AIRs) of Drawback related changes -reg.



|| 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