TMI Blog2015 (3) TMI 1182X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e case. We, accordingly, confirm the penalty thereon, levied at the minimum rate of 100% of the corresponding tax sought to be evaded, to that extent, so that no penalty could be levied on the interest attributable to the cash credit account, which the A.O. shall verify to his satisfaction, excluding also the interest paid, if any, on the term loan up to the due date of the filing the return, which again the A.O. shall verify. - Decided partly in favour of assessee. - I.T.A. No. 8125/Mum/2010 - - - Dated:- 25-3-2015 - SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JM AND SHRI SANJAY ARORA, AM For the Appellant Shri Rakesh Joshi For the Respondent Shri Neil Philip O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, A. M.: This is an Appeal by the Ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on record), also initiating the penalty proceedings u/s.271(1)(c) by issue of notice u/s.274 of even date. The assessee pleaded its case before the Revenue on the same basis, i.e., of it being constrained for want of information as to the extent of the bank liability outstanding, which fact had been in fact mentioned in the tax audit report as well. The company was in fact a sick company, registered with BIFR, reporting no profit even in the subsequent years. There was as such no loss of revenue, and the charge of evasion of tax thus does not stick. The company had in fact made a one-time settlement (OTS) with its bank, DCB, offering the gain on OTS, at ₹ 926.30 lacs, to tax for A.Y. 2006-07. The same not finding favour with the Reve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppropriated by its bank, and which it has been unable to exhibit. 3. We have heard the parties, and perused the material on record. The assessee s case rests on its claim being an inadvertent mistake, and which stood corrected in the first instance. However, as pointed out by the Revenue authorities, the same cannot be said to be voluntary, but only on the Revenue making a specific enquiry in the matter. Further, the assessee s contention of being constrained for want of necessary or relevant information is without substantiation. Why would not the bank give or share the relevant information with the assessee, who responded almost immediately during the assessment proceedings, i.e., vide written submissions dated 31.01.2006, foll ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the information, was that the assessee seek leave to revise its return, which the law even otherwise extends, i.e., where subsequently it discovers a claim as arising in the facts of its case. A legal claim, in fact, could be pressed at any stage of the assessment proceedings. The assessee s plea of no loss to the Revenue is of no consequence in view of the clear provision of law defining the term tax sought to be evaded , under Explanation 4 thereto, and with reference to which the penalty is to be levied, and for which reference stands made by the ld. CIT(A), and only rightly so, to the decisions in CIT v. Gold Coin Health Foods (P.) Ltd. [2008] 304 ITR 308 (SC) and Union of India v. Dharmendra Textile Processors [2008] 306 ITR ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
