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 →

Anil Mehra Versus ITO-Wd 22 (3) 2, Mumbai

Penalty under section 271(1)(c) - concealment of income - Held that:- There are two components of income assessed, one, income originally assessed and other, addition made in the second assessment order. Now, in the second order penalty under section 271(1)(c) has been initiated, which was not in the original assessment order . Satisfaction of the AO in the second order was with regard to ₹ 35 lakhs only, which was evident from the finding and observation of the AO as reproduced above. It .....

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 the time of original assessment, therefore, the same cannot be revived in the second assessment order sans any satisfaction or initiation. Thus, on this preliminary ground itself, we are of the opinion that, contention raised by the Ld. Counsel appears to be correct and no penalty under section 271(1)(c) on addition of ₹ 3,20,870/- can be sustained. Accordingly, we direct the AO to delete the penalty of ₹ 73,774/-. Thus, the appeal for the assessment year 2003-04 is allowed.
< .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

proceedings are separate and distinct from assessment proceedings. Here, in this case now the entire assessment and consequent addition rests upon pure estimation of income, therefore, neither the case of concealment of income nor for furnishing of inaccurate particulars. Thus, penalty levied by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A) on the premise raised by the authorities below cannot be confirmed. Accordingly, we delete the penalty for both the years. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No. : .....

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 assessment year 2001-02, 2002-03 and 2003-04. The quantum of penalty levied for all the three years: Assessment year Quantum penalty levied 2001-02 Rs.5,98,661/- 2002-03 Rs.2,31,900/- 2003-04 ₹ 73,774/- 2. We will first take-up appeal for the assessment year 2003-04 in ITA No. 1117/Mum/2012. 3. Brief background of the case is that, the assessee is an individual and carrying out activities of a Civil Contractor, mainly working for the Government Department under his Proprietary concern .....

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 was estimated at a net profit of ₹ 3,20,866/- which was 8% of the gross receipts. Later, on an information was received/collected from some earlier survey action in the premises of the assessee in the year 2002, during the course of which, assessee had disclosed an amount of ₹ 35 lakhs to be assessed as his income in the assessment year 2003-04. This information was stated to have been received by the AO on 13.04.2006, that is, after the passing of the assessment order under 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

t shown for various assessment years including AY 2003-04 as discussed in the assessment order is reproduced hereunder :- It is important to note that during the survey proceedings, an understatement of income was worked by the survey party, as shown below and accordingly the assessee had agreed to offer ₹ 35 lakhs being undisclosed income accrued out of income for various previous years. The survey party had gathered information on total contract receipt of the assessee for AY 1996-97 to .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

6,06,904 2001-02 23,00,000 6,91,680 Total 9,93,56,249 38,50,458 Estimation of profit @ 8% u/s 44AD, of ₹ 9,93,56,249 Rs.79,48,499/- Profit offered by the assessee for These years Rs.38,50,458/- Difference is treated as Understatement of income Rs.40,98,014/- From this it is crystal clear that the survey party had gathered enough evidence and therefore, the assessee conceded exclusion of the above amount and offered ₹ 35 lakhs in toto as undisclosed income for AY 2003-04. Hence, 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

assessee during the survey action u/s133-A Rs.35,00,000 Total Taxable Income Rs.38,20,870 3. Against the said order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A). We find that Ld. CIT(A) though held that the computation of income by estimating the net profit @ 8% is correct, however, he deleted the amount of ₹ 35,00,000/- which was surrendered in his order dated 03.03.2009 after giving detail reasoning and holding as under: I have carefully considered the assessment order and the ar .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

come. This is evident from the relevant part of the assessment order reproduced above, wherein the AO has computed estimated income of the appellant @ 8% of gross contract receipt of ₹ 79,48,499/- and reduced there from the net profit as per return of income already disclosed in the respective assessment years of ₹ 38,50,556/- and, accordingly worked out the difference as under statement of income of ₹ 40,98,071/- of the appellant. The AO, therefore, taking into consideration, .....

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 respective assessment years and not in the present assessment year. It is a settled law that as per the scheme of the Income -tax Act, the income of an assessee for a particular previous year relevant to the concerned assessment year is only to be assessed in the relevant assessment year. The income pertaining to one year cannot be clubbed or assessed in another assessment year. If the AO had valid reasons or evidence that the appellant has concealed or not disclosed income of a particular 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

1996-97 to 2001-02, in the AY 2003-04. I find that same is not warranted since the same is found to be contrary to the basic provisions of the Act. The declaration or disclosure made by the appellant during the survey based on above mentioned facts are also found to be against the basic provisions of the Act. There is no material or evidences brought on record, which suggest that the appellant has earned the declared income in the previous year relevant to current assessment year. There is no ev .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

1-02 and the net profit disclosed in the concerned assessment years as discussed above. There are no evidences or any incriminating material found in survey to suggest that the net profit shown in the current assessment years is understated by the appellant to the extent of ₹ 35 lakhs. The income pertaining to the current assessment year as discussed above in the para 3 of this order is separately worked out @ 8% of his gross contract receipts credited in his bank account, in the absence 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

e considered opinion that under the given circumstances, AO is not required to make the addition, just for the sake of making an addition. Nevertheless, even if it is construed that the AO is fair and reasonable to estimate net contract income of the appellant @ 8% of gross contract receipts for the relevant assessment years, I find that the AO should have proceeded to re-assess the escaped income of relevant assessment years of the appellant, as per various provisions of the Act. His action to .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

which was as per the original assessment order dated 28.11.2005 passed under section 144 r w s 147. The AO has levied the penalty of ₹ 73,774/- on this amount after discussing the issue in detail. This penalty has been confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) in his consolidated order. However, in the impugned order, the Ld. CIT(A) has mainly gone by the fact that, assessee had not filed his return of income and was solely guided by the fact that assessee has voluntarily disclosed a sum of ₹ 35 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

he business of a civil contractor mainly executing road construction for various Government Departments during the relevant accounting years under consideration He has not filed his returns of income for these assessment years as required under section 139(1) of the Act. Further, in the case of the appellant a survey under section 133A of the Act was carried out on 12.08.2002; during the course of the said proceedings, the appellant has voluntarily disclosed a sum of ₹ 35 lakhs for the ass .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

pellant in response to the notices issued under section 148 of the Act. Besides, as per the facts brought on record by the AO in the assessment orders under appeal, the appellant has failed to attend the assessment proceedings before the AO and he has also failed to furnish the relevant details and its supporting evidences as called for the AO. Therefore, on account of these facts and circumstances, all the three assessment orders were completed ex parte under section 144 of the Act. These facts .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

deliberately avoid or evade the payment of taxes due to the Government. However, the AR has submitted that it is only because of the above reasons that the appellant could not furnish his returns of income and therefore, could not make the payment of taxes due in all these assessment years under appeal. 2.3.1 With this background, I find no merits in the submissions of the AR, a discussed above. From the bare facts available on record as discussed in detail in the assessment orders, penalty orde .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

years under appeal. This coupled with the fact that the appellant has also failed to furnish any necessary details and supporting evidences which has directly resulted into the completion of assessment orders in an ex parte manner as per the provisions of section 144 of the Act. Therefore, on account of these facts placed on record which are not disputed or denied by the AR, I find little merits in the submissions of the AR that the appellant has reasonable or sufficient cause for not furnishin .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

turns of the income due to noncooperation of his earlier chartered accountant and due to non-availability of the books of account and records. The AR has also failed to substantiate the relevant submissions made inasmuch as no such details and evidences were furnished or placed on record. Nothing is brought on record to prove the non-cooperation on the part of his earlier Chartered Accountant as well as non-availability of the books of account and records. Moreover, the additions made and sustai .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ng that the demining provisions of Explanation (1) to section 271(1)(c) are clearly attracted in the case of the appellant and therefore, making him liable for the levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act in all these assessment yeas under appeal . 3.3.2 x x x.. 3.3.3 x x x… 3.3.4 In the case of the appellant the explanation furnished by the AR as discussed above is unsubstantiated inasmuch as noting is brought on record to prove that the appellant did not file his returns of in .....

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 has ultimately resulted into completion of ex parte assessment orders u/s 144 of the Act in all these assessment years under appeal. It may further be noted that even after conducting a survey u/s 133A and voluntary disclosure of undisclosed income therein, the appellant has still failed to furnish his return of income for the AY. 2003-04. These undisputed facts demolish the submissions of the AR that the appellant has reasonable or sufficient cause for not furnishing or filing his .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

pellant is duly established as per the assessment orders passed in the case of the appellant which are substantially confirmed in the appellate orders dated 30.12.2008 for the assessment year 2001-02 and 2002-03 and dated 03.30.2009 for the Assessment year 2003-04. Therefore, on account of these fact the explanation of the AR furnished before the AO as well as in appeal, as discussed above is proved to be false or unsubstantiated. Therefore, on account of these facts of the case, I find that 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

itself was deleted. The only income surviving was originally assessed income. This factum itself vitiates the finding of ld. CIT(A). 4. Before us, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee canvassed a very pertinent point that here in this case, original assessment was completed under section 144/148 whereby the income of the assessee was assessed after estimating at a net profit @ 8% on the lines of section 44AD at ₹ 3,20,870/-. In such an order, no penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) 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

essment proceedings and the assessment order. Thus, on this ground, the penalty levied by the AO cannot be sustained. 5. On the other hand, Ld. DR strongly relying upon the order of the CIT(A) submitted that, even though penalty was not initiated originally but the original order got merged with the second order, therefore, penalty which has been initiated in the second order should be the basis for levy of penalty. 6. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the relevant material as discuss .....

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 action whereby assessee has offered ₹ 35 lakhs to be assessed as income, a proposal was moved before the CIT to revise the assessment order under section 263. Thereafter assessment order in pursuance thereof was passed and assessment framed for making further addition of ₹ 35 lakhs. In the second assessment order, the AO has solely given his finding on the additional income of ₹ 35 lakhs offered by the assessee during the survey. The income which was originally asse .....

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 second order was with regard to ₹ 35 lakhs only, which was evident from the finding and observation of the AO as reproduced above. It is an undisputed fact in the appellate proceedings the addition of ₹ 35 lakhs was deleted and confirmed from the stage of ITAT and has attained finality. Since the very basis for the initiation of penalty and satisfaction of the AO for the addition of ₹ 35 lakhs got vitiated, therefore, the entire proceedings for levy of penalty does not hav .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ned. Accordingly, we direct the AO to delete the penalty of ₹ 73,774/-. Thus, the appeal for the assessment year 2003-04 is allowed. 7. Now, we will take-up the penalty appeal for the assessment year 2002-03 and 2001-02, which have identical set of facts. From the perusal of the facts as discussed in the assessment order is that, a survey action was conducted in the case of the assessee s office premise on 12.08.2002 during the course of which assessee had declared an income of ₹ 35 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ction 144, after taking into account the receipts shown in the Proprietor business bank account and also individual saving account, which reflected total transaction of ₹ 85,28,521/- in the case of Proprietorship Firm and ₹ 76,73,044/- in his individual capacity for the assessment year 2001-02 and aggregate of ₹ 2,61,01,900/- in the assessment year 2002-03 on account of the bank account of the firm as well as the individual saving account. Accordingly, the AO estimated the net .....

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 penalty order, the Ld. AO held that, since no return of income was filed and no books of accounts were maintained, therefore, there was no option but to estimate the income on some reasonable basis and accordingly, he levied the penalty of ₹ 5,98,661/- for the assessment year 2001-02 and ₹ 2,31,891/- for the assessment year 2002-03. The Ld. CIT(A) too has confirmed the penalty, the relevant finding on which has already been reproduced by us while deciding the appeal for the assessm .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

th contract receipts as well as net profit shown. Thus, the very premise for levy of penalty does not stand. 9. On the other hand, Ld. DR strongly relied upon the order of the CIT(A) and submitted that, there is a categorical observation and finding of CIT(A) that assessee has not filed the return of income and hence a penalty confirmed by the CIT(A) is justified. 10. After considering the rival submissions and on perusal of the relevant material discussed in the impugned order we find that, 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

act receipts and net profit and assessee do not bother to comply with the notices and did not put forth any explanation. While confirming the penalty he has taken note of the disclosure of undisclosed income of ₹ 35 Lakhs offered by the assessee during the survey, without realizing the fact that the said order and addition does not survive as the addition itself stands deleted by the CIT(A) in the quantum proceedings but also got confirmed by the Tribunal in Revenue s appeal vide order dat .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

AY 2003-04 which has been reproduced above, is again being reiterated as under: The survey party had gathered information on total contract receipt of the assessee for AY 1996-97 to AY 2001-02 on the basis of return of income filed and cross verified it with net profit actually declared by the assessee in these years, whereby it was evident that there was an omission of ₹ 40,98,041/- (as worked out below) on the part of the assessee to offer the same for tax. Assessment year Total Contract .....

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, that return of income was filed and also cross verified by the Survey Party, can the finding of CIT(A) be sustained. Once the contract receipts has been shown in the return of income along with the net profit, then the whole premise on which penalty has been levied and confirmed gets vitiated. Only issue for the levy of penalty can be, firstly, the enhancement of contract receipts and secondly, the net profit estimated in the assessment proceedings initiated under section 148. The AO in 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

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     Latest Happenings     ↓  

Forum: 3B mistake

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

Forum: Manpower Service provider

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

Article: ‘DUTY DRAWBACK’ CANNOT BE EQUATED WITH ‘REBATE OF DUTY’

Forum: GST on Notional rent

Highlight: Notification regarding GST rate for branded cereal, pulses and flour

News: Notification regarding GST rate for branded cereal, pulses and flour

Highlight: Anti-dumping duty on import of bus/truck tyres from China

Highlight: Cabinet approves Extension of time period of the Scheme "Special Industry Initiative for J&K" (Sll J&K) - Udaan

Highlight: Non-payment of service tax - maintenance and repair charges - appellants had knowingly and deliberately shown the repair charges as job work charges to mislead about their taxability - demand confirmed.

Highlight: BAS - execution of the project of smart card for vehicle registration – implementing the SOC-VRC project - The fact that the Government has outsourced some part of the work and paid certain consideration for such outsourced work, does not make the activity subject to service tax.

Forum: Input tax credit

Forum: Cess paid instead of SGST

Circular: Amendments in Hand Book of Procedures 2015-20 –reg.

News: Cabinet approves Extension of time period of the Scheme "Special Industry Initiative for J&K" (Sll J&K) - Udaan

Highlight: Constitution of National Anti-profiteering Authority (NAA) under GST-reg. - Trade Notice

Highlight: Amendments in Hand Book of Procedures 2015-20 –reg. - Various amendments are made in Chapter-4 of Hand Book of Procedures 2015-2020.

Forum: GST rates on mobile recharge business

Circular: Constitution of National Anti-profiteering Authority (NAA) under GST-reg.

Highlight: Sharing of expenses - BAS - promotion of business of group companies - sharing of expenditure for common facilities cannot be treated as service by one to another in such arrangement.

News: RBI Reference Rate for US $

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

Circular: Certain Clarifications sought on Construction Services provided in the Real Estate Sector – reg.

News: Anti-dumping duty on import of bus/truck tyres from China

News: Fast-track GST refund, else ₹ 65K cr may be stuck: Exporters

Highlight: It is open to the Settlement Commission to use best judgment in arrival of the figure. Nonetheless it has to explain the manner in which the best judgment figure has been arrived at by the Settlement Commission - HC

Highlight: Deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) - advances given to societies - in the absence of legal right of the assessee in the said society the amount advanced cannot be treated as deemed income.

Highlight: When electrical installations are treated as plant and machinery the depreciation has to be allowed @ 25% as per provisions contained u/s 32

TMI Note: Capital Gain - transfer of right in the land or transfer of land itself - addition u/s 50C - Harassment to the honest tax payers

Highlight: Option to avail composition scheme under GST by electronically filing an intimation in FORM GST CMP-02 and FORM GST ITC-03 upto 30-9-2017 - See Rule 3(3A)

TMI Note: Does ICDS apply for the purposes of computing exemption u/s 11 to 13.

Highlight: Voluntary Reporting of Estimated Current Income and Advance Tax Liability - CBDT issues draft notification

TMI Note: Certain ICDS provisions are inconsistent with judicial precedents. Whether these judicial precedents would prevail over ICDS.

Highlight: Provisions of ICDS shall prevail w.e.f. AY 2017-18 to the transactional issues dealt therein over earlier judicial pronouncements.

Notification: Levy of anti dumping duty on New/unused pneumatic radial tyres with or without tubes and/or flap of rubber (including tubeless tyres) having normal rim dia code above 16 originating in, or exported from China PR

News: Voluntary Reporting of Estimated Current Income and Advance Tax Liability

TMI Note: In case of conflict between ICDS and other specific provisions of the Income-tax rules, 1962 governing taxation of income like rules 9A, 9B etc. of the Rules, which provisions shall prevail.

TMI Note: Does ICDS apply to computation of Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) u/s 115JB of the Act or Alternate Minimum Tax (AMT) u/s 115JC of the Act.

TMI Note: Where a term has not been defined under ICDS, nor under the Act, but has different interpretations given to it by the courts in tax cases, and in ICAI Accounting Standards, which interpretation would prevail while interpreting ICDS.

TMI Note: Whether the provisions of ICDS apply to a non-resident who claims the benefit of a double taxation avoidance agreement (DTAA).

TMI Note: In case any of the ICDS provisions is contrary to a circular or press release issued by the CBDT, which would prevail over the other.

TMI Note: ICDS-I requires disclosure of significant accounting policies and other ICDS requires specific disclosures. Where is the taxpayer required to make such disclosures specified in ICDS.

Notification: Income Computation and Disclosure Standards (ICDS) - New ICDS to be effective from AY 2017-18

News: RBI Reference Rate for US $

Highlight: GST - Detention of goods under transport - discrepancy in documents - the statutory provisions provide a mechanism for adjudication following detention of goods including for the provisional release thereof pending adjudication - HC

Highlight: Reassessment - first few paragraphs of the assessment order dealt with objections and disposed of accordingly - Unfortunately, the manner in which the AO has decided the issue is wholly unsustainable in law - HC

Highlight: Business expenditure u/s 37 - liquidated damage - breach of contract terms - Expenditure was not incurred for any purpose which is an offence or which is prohibited by law - cannot be disallowed - HC

Highlight: Valuation - inclusion of reimbursement of expenses - managing participation of clients in certain mela, fairs, promotional activities etc. - They are liable to service tax on the gross amount received - They cannot restrict their tax liability to only agency commission

Highlight: TDS liability - ITAT confirmed the liability - We do not see how it is possible for us to uphold the order of the Tribunal and when it purports to decide two Appeals of the Revenue by single paragraph conclusion - HC



|| 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