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

2016 (5) TMI 339 - ITAT DELHI

2016 (5) TMI 339 - ITAT DELHI - TMI - 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 particul .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

greater importance is the necessity for 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 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

are that on the basis of the information 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 rece .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ely M/s Fern N Petals- E Commerce and 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 inc .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

eproduced here in under:- 5. In the case 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 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

7; 16,15,240/- on 16.12.2010 for the taxable 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 L .....

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 was no information available with 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 .....

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 148 29-09-2010 Date of Filing ROI 16-12-2010 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 Pharmaceutic .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ee had made a complete disclosure in the 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 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

income. He submitted that in light of 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 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ncealment or furnishing of inaccurate 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 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

 

 

 

 

 



|| 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