Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Meeta Gutgutia Versus ACIT, Central Cirle-10, New Delhi

2016 (5) TMI 339 - ITAT DELHI

penalty u/s 271(1)(c)- Held that:- It is an undisputed fact that the returned income has been accepted, there is no satisfaction recorded by the assessing officer that assessee had concealed income with reference to return of income filed by him in response to notice u/s 148.

Supreme Court in Varkey Chacko v. CIT [1993 (8) TMI 1 - SUPREME Court ] has held that a penalty for concealment of particulars of income or for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income can be imposed only when .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

r a definite finding that there is concealment, as without such a finding of concealment, there can be no question of imposing any penalty. In the assessee’s case, the AO has not given any finding in assessment order that the assessee had concealed any income or furnished inaccurate particulars of such income. He had simply accepted the returned income u/s 148. Hence assessee’s case is covered by the decisions referred to above and penalty u/s 271(1)(c) will not be imposable. - Decided in favour .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ion in possession of the Assessing Officer that the assessee s income to the extent of ₹ 26,89,149/- had escaped assessment, action u/s 147 of the I.T. Act, 1961 was initiated and accordingly, a notice u/s 148 was issued. The information which was in possession of the Assessing Officer was Form No. 26AS filed by the deductor with the department, which showed that for the financial year 2007-08, relevant to assessment year 2008-09, the assessee had received a total amount of ₹ 26,98,1 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

M/s. Fern N Petals. After examining the details/information on record, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment in terms of order u/s 148/143(3) dated 30.12.2011 at a total income of ₹ 51,53,610/- as declared by the assessee in the return filed in response to notice u/s 148 of the I.T. Act, 1961. 2.1 Since no return of income for the assessment year under consideration u/s 139(1) or 139(4) of the I.T. Act, 1961 was filed by the appellant, the income declared and assessed at ₹ 5 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

se of the assessee, she had taxable income for A.Y. 2008-09 for which she was liable to furnish her return of income before the due date of the relevant year or at the most before the expiry of one year from the end of the relevant Assessment Year i.e. only upto 31/03/2010. Whereas, the assessee has filed her return of Income on 16.12.2010 i.e. only after issue of notice u/s 148 of the I.T. Act, on 29.09.2010. The intention of the assessee to conceal her particulars of income proves from the fac .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

axable income shown in the return of income filed in response to notice u/s 148. Therefore, it is only in pursuance of the department, that the assessee has disclosed her taxable income for the A.Y. 2008-09 and has paid the taxes. 4. In appeal before the First Appellate Authority, the Ld. CIT (A) confirmed the imposition of penalty but reduced the quantum to 100% of the tax allegedly sought to be evaded. 5. Now, the assessee is in appeal before us. 5.1 The Ld. AR submitted that Income returned 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

h the Department as to any concealment having been made by the assessee. It was urged by the Ld. AR that the assessee is regularly assessed u/s 143(3) with Central Circle-19 (Erstwhile CC- 10) for previous AY s and the Return u/s 139(1) not filed for the year could not be filed due to the following reasons : (a) Due to financial paucity balance tax due could not be paid by the due date, and (b) Prior to amendment in section 139(9) inserted by the Finance Act 2013, w.e.f. 1-6-2013, any return fil .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

6-12-2010 5.3 The Ld. AR submitted that from a conjoint reading of the provisions of section 153(1) as well as the factual matrix of significant dates it was clear that not only did the assessment proceedings start before the expiry of due date u/s 153(1) but return was also submitted in compliance thereof before the expiry of the prescribed time limit u/s 153(1). The Ld. AR also submitted that Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. SAS Pharmaceuticals 335 ITR 259 (Del) in Para 15 and 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

he income-tax return and offered the entire income for the purposes of tax. He submitted that the returned income was accepted by the AO and no addition was made and hence the penalty u/s 271(1)(c ) was not imposable. He also submitted that the assessee s case is squarely covered by the findings of the ITAT Bangalore Bench in the case of Muninaga Reddy vs. ACIT ITA 1488/Bang/2012 for the preposition that when an income which is ultimately brought to tax is declared in a return of income, there c .....

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 facts of the case and the settled judicial pronouncements the penalty ought to be deleted. 5.4 The Ld. DR relied on the order of the Ld. CIT (A) and submitted that the penalty evaded ought to be sustained. 6. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. It is an undisputed fact that the returned income has been accepted, there is no satisfaction recorded by the assessing officer that assessee had concealed income with reference to return of income filed by him in r .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

particulars. The penalty was permissible under the law on the date on which the offence of concealment of income was committed, that is to say, on the date of the offending return. Hon ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. K.R. Chinni Krishna Chetty [2000] 246 ITR 121 has held that under section 271(1)(c) of the Act the authority is given the discretion to levy a penalty if there is concealment of particulars of income and even as regards the quantum of the penalty there is a discretion. 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

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

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

Go to Mobile Version