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 →

Dr. G. Sambasiva Reddy Versus ACIT, Circle-1, Rajahmundry AND ITO, Ward-4, Rajahmundry Versus Dr. G. Sambasiva Reddy

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Held that:- In the present case on hand, the assessee right from the beginning contends that he has not maintained regular books of accounts, so as to say whether those 12 receipts which are the basis for estimation of income was accounted in the books of accounts or not. The assessee explained that he has fairly estimated his income based on the available information and arrived at annual gross receipts of ₹ 20 to 25 lakhs and after all expenses for maintenance 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

amounting to ₹ 2,14,177/- which is subsumed in the extra income declared during the course of survey. The A.O. had his own apprehension that assessee would not have declared his true and correct income, if survey could not taken place. Whether survey is taken place or not, the fact remains that the due date for furnishing return for both the assessment years was not over as on the date of survey. Therefore, there is no scope for such suspicion and surmises in the penalty proceedings.
.....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

to delete the penalty of ₹ 10 lakhs levied u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. - Decided in favour of assessee - I.T.A.No.314/Vizag/2013, I.T.A.No.318/Vizag/2013 - Dated:- 18-3-2016 - SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For The Appellant : Shri G.V.N. Hari, AR For The Respondent : Shri M.N. Murthy Naik, DR PER G. MANJUNATHA, Accountant Member: These cross appeals filed by the assessee, as well as revenue are directed against the order of CIT(A)-11, Mumbai, Ca .....

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 Act was issued to the assessee, for concealment of particulars of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. A survey was conducted u/s 133A of the Act on the professional premises of the assessee on 23.9.2008. During the course of survey, it was noticed that the assessee has not filed any return of income for the assessment year in question and also for the assessment year 2007-08. It was further noticed that a few loose slips found during the course of survey, reveals the p .....

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 out-patient is about ₹ 6,000/-. By taking into account average daily collections of ₹ 6,000/- per day, his annual collections would be around ₹ 20 to 25 lakhs and after all expenditure towards maintenance of hospital, the net annual income would be around ₹ 15 lakhs. However, I am not in a position to substantiate my professional receipts and expenses with necessary documentary evidence, therefore agreed to admit a sum of ₹ 20 lakhs each for the assessment year 20 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ing Officer has completed the assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act and determined total income of ₹ 22,78,580/-. While doing so, the Assessing Officer has accepted the return of income filed by the assessee, in addition made separate additions towards referral income received from two diagnostic centers, which was not considered by the assessee in the return of income. 3. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer issued a show cause notice u/s 271(1)(c) r.w.s. 274 of the Act and asked to explain why p .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

with a request to the assessing officer for immunity from penal proceedings. Therefore, requested to drop penalty proceedings. The Assessing Officer however after considering the explanations furnished by the assessee, levied the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. While doing so, the Assessing Officer was of the opinion that the assessee has willfully concealed the particulars of income and also furnished inaccurate particulars of income. Therefore, this is a fit case for levy of penalty u/s 271 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t additional income, therefore, it cannot be considered as voluntary disclosure of income. With these observations, the Assessing Officer levied penalty of ₹ 10 lakhs u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. 4. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A). Before the CIT(A), the assessee reiterated the submissions made before the Assessing Officer. The CIT(A) after considering the explanations furnished by the assessee, upheld the penalty levied by the Assessing 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

eal before us. 5. The Ld. Authorised Representative of the assessee submitted that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is contrary to the facts and also the law applicable to the facts of the case. The Authorised Representative further submitted that the CIT(A) was not justified in sustaining minimum penalty of 100% levied u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. The Authorised Representative further submitted that the assessee has disclosed additional income during the course of survey under estimation basis. It was .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

survey, the Assessing Officer levied penalty by holding that the assessee did not filed the return of income as on the date of survey. The Authorised Representative further submitted that as on the date of survey, i.e. on 23.9.2008, the due date for furnishing return of income for the assessment year in question was not over. Therefore, the Assessing Officer was not correct in holding that the assessee would not have filed return of income and disclosed true and correct income for taxation, if .....

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) of the Act in total, as he himself stated that it is a fit case for levy of penalty. The Ld. D.R. further submitted that the CIT(A) erred in not giving cogent reasons for restricting the penalty to 100% of the taxes sought to be evaded, when he is convinced that the assessee did not offer any explanations, therefore requested to uphold the penalty order passed by the assessing officer. The D.R. further submitted that the assessee has willfully concealed the particulars of income and also fu .....

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, which cannot be considered as voluntary disclosure of income. Therefore, requested to uphold the penalty order passed by the A.O. 7. We have heard both the parties and perused the materials available on record. The factual matrix of the case is that there was a survey u/s 133A of the Act in this case on 23.9.2008. As on the date of survey, the assessee did not filed return of income for the assessment year in question and also for the assessment year 2007-08. During the course of survey, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rther query from the A.O. admitted that his average daily collection from inpatient and outpatient is around ₹ 6,000/-, by taking into account the average daily collection his professional collections would be around ₹ 20 to 25 lakhs per annum. From this, after meeting the expenditure for maintenance of hospital, the net income would be around ₹ 15 lakhs per annum, which is probable and estimated. Since, I am not in a position to substantiate my receipts and expenditure with ne .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

lars of income, which is evident from the facts that he did not filed return and also not paid any advance tax. The A.O. was of the opinion that if the survey could not taken place, the assessee would not have disclosed his true and correct income. Because, the survey party found loose sheets which indicates the suppressed income, the assessee has accepted additional income which is not voluntary. The department has gathered some material information, which was the reason for disclosure of addit .....

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 of survey and also paid taxes before filing the return of income. He further submitted that he had made a fair estimation of income and disclosed over and above his probable income to buy peace and to cooperate with the department for smooth completion of assessment proceedings. It was further stated that the declaration of income was made with a request to immunity from penalty provisions and his request at the time of survey have to be taken as impliedly accepted. 9. We have considered the s .....

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 tax sought to be evaded. Explanation (1) appended to section 271(1)(c) of the Act, provides for levy of penalty, if that person fails to offer an explanation or the explanation offered by such person is found to be false or the explanation offered by him is not substantiated and he fails to prove such explanations is bonafide and that all facts relating to the same and material to the computation of his total income has been disclosed by him represents the concealed income. Similarly, explan .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

T(A) is satisfied that in respect of such assessment year, such person has taxable income, then such person shall for the purpose of clause (c) of this sub section, be deemed to have concealed the particulars of his income, notwithstanding the fact that such person furnishes a return of his income at any time after the expiry of the period aforesaid. The concealment of particulars of income and furnishing inaccurate particulars of income should be referred to return of income filed by the 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

ollections between ₹ 20 to 25 lakhs and after all expenditure a net income of ₹ 15 lakhs has been estimated. Further, the assessee has disclosed ₹ 20 lakhs for the assessment year under consideration and also for the assessment year 2007-08. Further, the assessee has filed return of income admitting income disclosed in the survey and also paid taxes before filing the return of income. It is not a case of A.O. that he had gathered concealment of income based on certain incrimina .....

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)(c) of the Act provides for levy of penalty, in a case where any assessee, fails without reasonable cause, to furnish within the period specified in sub section 1 of section 153 of the Act, a return of his income which he is required to furnish under section 139 of the Act, in respect of any assessment year and the A.O. and CIT(A) is satisfied that in respect of such assessment year, such person has taxable income, than such person shall for the purpose of clause (c) of this sub section, may d .....

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 of the A.O. that assessee would not have filed return and not disclosed true and correct income. In the present case on hand, as on the date of survey i.e. on 23.9.2008, the due date of furnishing return of income for the assessment year 2008-09 was not over. Therefore, the A.O. was not correct in coming to the conclusion that the assessee would not have filed return of income if survey was not conducted. Similarly, the A.O. stated that assessee has not filed any return of income for the asses .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rovisions of section could not be complied with is primarily an essential question of fact and it has to be decided in each case on consideration of materials placed before the concerned authority. The levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act is not automatic. Before levying the penalty, the concerned officer is required to find out that even there was any violation referred to in the said provisions and the same was without a reasonable cause. The initial burden is on the assessee to show that .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ch are the basis for estimation of income was accounted in the books of accounts or not. The assessee explained that he has fairly estimated his income based on the available information and arrived at annual gross receipts of ₹ 20 to 25 lakhs and after all expenses for maintenance of hospital, net income would be around ₹ 15 lakhs which is probable and estimated. However, he disclosed ₹ 20 lakhs which is over and above his estimated income with a request to immunity from the p .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

if survey could not taken place. Whether survey is taken place or not, the fact remains that the due date for furnishing return for both the assessment years was not over as on the date of survey. Therefore, there is no scope for such suspicion and surmises in the penalty proceedings. 12. Coming to the case laws relied upon by the assessee. The assessee relied upon the judgment of Hon ble High Court of Delhi, in the case of CIT Vs. SAS Pharmaceuticals, reported in (2011) 335 ITR 239, wherein 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

e assessee. Sec. 271(1)(C) authorizes imposition of penalty when the AO is satisfied that the assessee has either : (a) concealed the particulars of his income; or (b) furnished inaccurate particulars of such income. It is not the case of furnishing inaccurate particulars of income, as in the IT return, particulars of income have been duly furnished and the surrendered amount of income was duly reflected in the IT return. The quest/on is whether the particulars of income were concealed by the 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

the penalty proceedings and directed the payment of penalty. He had not recorded any satisfaction during the course of survey. Decision to initiate penalty proceedings was taken while making assessment order. It is, thus, obvious that the expression 'in the course of any proceedings under this Act' cannot have the reference to survey proceedings in this case. It necessarily follows that concealment of particulars of income or furnishing of inaccurate particular of income by the assessee .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

, there cannot be any penalty only on surmises, conjectures and possibilities. Sec. 271 (1) (c) has to be construed strictly. Unless it is found that there is actually a concealment or non-disclosure of the particulars of income, penalty cannot be imposed. There is no such concealment or non-disclosure as the assessee had made a complete disclosure in the IT return and offered the surrendered amount for the purposes of tax.-CIT vs. Mohan Das Hassa Nand (1983) 34 CTR (Del) 361 (1983) 141 ITR 203 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

. Ltd. Vs. DCIT 300 ITR 40 (A.P.) considered similar situation and held that penalty is not imposable. Further, held that in absence of anything to show that any other material was available with Assessing Officer to effect that assessee concealed income, it is not open to Assessing Officer to invoke power u/s 271(1)(c) levying penalty. Following said decision penalty u/s 271(1)(c) was not imposable. Even otherwise, assessee having given bonafide explanation that he had offered higher income eve .....

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     ↓  

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

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

Forum: GST Invoice

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.

News: GST implementation smoother than expected: Jaitley

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

Forum: 3B mistake

Forum: Input tax credit

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

Forum: Due date of Filing TRAN-1

Highlight: Diversion of income at source - Joint venture agreement - 97% of the receipt transfer to M/s TRG Industries (P) Ltd. - scope of the agreement - it is diversion by overriding title - not taxable in the hands of assessee - HC

Highlight: Expenditure on eligible projects or schemes u/s 35AC - After 01.04.2017 the legislature desired to withdraw such deduction. - The Union legislature was competent to introduce such amendment - HC

Highlight: Transfer of trading assets at cost price, the profit component also stood transferred to the outgoing Directors, which otherwise belonged to the Company - the fact that AO has made the addition in the hands of the Directors would not make any difference - additions confirmed - HC

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

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.

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



|| 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