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

2016 (8) TMI 224 - ITAT MUMBAI

2016 (8) TMI 224 - ITAT MUMBAI - TMI - Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - assessee has claimed deduction u/s 54F seeking exemption of long term capital gains amounting to ₹ 1,13,73,000/- arising on account of surrender of sub-tenancy - Held that:- The claim of the assessee made in the return of income to declare the income as long term capital gain on surrender of tenancy vide registered deed dated 12-04-2007 was in-fact wrong claim lodged to reduce the tax liability. The assessee himself withdrew 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

onfronted by the Revenue. - As the assessee made a wrong claim in the return of income of having sub-tenancy in the said premises while the fact of the matter in the present case before us is that the assessee did not had any such sub-tenancy in the said property as the assessee failed to prove the existence of sub-tenancy and the claim of the assessee was found to be false claim and explanations offered by the assessee were found by the Revenue to be false and clearly explanation1 to Sectio .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- 30, Mumbai (hereinafter called the CIT(A) ), for the assessment year 2008-09, the appellate proceedings before the learned CIT(A) arising from the penalty order dated 11th May,2011 passed by the learned Assessing Officer (hereinafter called the AO ) u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act,1961 (Hereinafter called the Act ). 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue before Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai (hereinafter called the Tribunal ) in the m .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

other sources" or "Capital Gain" incurs substantial effect on allowability of deductions u/s 54F of the IT Act and the rate of tax, thus the treatment of the income under different head can be intentional to reduce the tax liability which can also well be termed as furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned CIT(A) has failed to appreciate the facts that offering income after selection of return for 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

ged in the business in estate agencies and brokerage. During the course of assessment proceedings u/s 143(3) read with Section 143(2) of the Act , the AO observed from the records, that the assessee has shown receipts on sale of long term capital asset at ₹ 1,13,73,000/- which were claimed exempt u/s. 54F of the Act. The assessee was asked by the AO to submit the details in respect of the transactions in respect of the sale of long term capital asset and claim of exemption u/s.54F of 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

uctures thereon to M/s Second Land Developers Private Ltd. subject to the occupations of the areas in possession with the tenants/sub- tenants. Thereafter by a Deed of Surrender of Tenancy dated 12th April, 2007 the assessee surrendered to M/s Second Land Developers Private Ltd. all his tenancy rights in the said premises in his occupation. The agreement dated 12th April, 2007 was stamped and registered and was submitted by the assessee before the AO during the course of assessment proceedings u .....

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 before the AO that he does not presently have any receipts of electricity bills, telephone bills, payment of taxes made to various government bodies in respect of the said tenanted property. It was submitted that no Sub-tenancy agreement with Mr. Rajni C. Shah was entered into by the assessee , and he also did not obtain any license for the business carried on by him from the said property under the Shops and Establishment Act. The assessee gave to the AO present address of Sh Rajni C. Shah. T .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nd Land Developers Private Ltd. The A.O. observed that the assessee has not been able to submit any details in respect of the sub-tenancy which he acquired in the year 1995 or any documentary proof of conducting any business in the said property from the year 1995 to 2007. The AO observed that primary onus is on assessee to prove sub-tenancy and in the absence of any contemporary evidence, the AO disbelieved the claim of the assessee with respect to sub-tenancy of the said premises. Notice u/s 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

oath. In response to the said notices u/s 133(6) of the Act, the electricity department BEST confirmed that there has never been any electricity connection either in the name of the assessee or in the name of Shri Rajni C. Shah. The Brihanmumbai Mahanagarpalika(BMC) has also given the details of the owner, tenants and sub-tenants of the property wherein name of the assessee did not appear as sub-tenant of the said property. Shri Rajni C. Shah appeared before the A.O. whereby statement was recor .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

statements recorded, that the assessee has fraudulently created sub-tenancy which never existed with a view to avoid tax by claiming the money received as long term capital gain and claiming exemption u/s 54F of the Act. The A.O. also went through the audit report of M/s Nevron Properties and Estates wherein the assessee was partner that the assessee has shown address as 84, Bhakhtawar,22, Narayan Dabholkar Road, Malabar Hill, Mumbai-66 and even in personal capital account and balance sheet file .....

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 deduction u/s 54F of the Act before the AO and showed the income under the head income from other sources as surrender of tenancy rights. The assessee counsel accepted before the AO on 14-12-2010 that he did not have any proof / evidence to support the sub-tenancy. The assessee also further stated in the letter dated 22-12-2010 that in fact the assessee helped in relation to sale of the premises at Worli by M/s Leach & Weborny to M/s Second Land Developers Private Ltd. The AO observed 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

t order dated 29-12-2010 passed by the AO u/s 143(3) of the Act as no appeal was filed by the assessee with the learned CIT(A) against the said assessment order dated 29-12-2010 passed by the AO u/s 143(3) of the Act which assessment order attained finality. Penalty proceedings were also initiated by the AO u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for filing inaccurate particulars of income and notices were issued to the assessee . The assessee in the penalty proceedings submitted that with a view to end disput .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

quested the AO to drop penalty proceedings initiated against him by the AO u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for filing inaccurate particulars of income. The A.O. rejected the contentions of the assessee. The A.O. observed that the assessee has claimed exemption u/s 54F of the Act on surrender of tenancy rights although the assessee was not the sub-tenant of the property of which tenancy rights were surrendered. The assessee withdrew the claim and surrendered the amount only when the assessee was cornere .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

a malafide intention of the assessee to conceal the particulars of income and the assessee never withdrew the claim or surrendered the amount voluntarily in order to buy peace and to end protracted litigation with Revenue but the assessee was cornered by the Revenue and hence the assessee was forced to surrender the claim before the AO. Thus , the AO observed that it is proved beyond reasonable doubt that the assessee had furnished inaccurate particulars of income adding to the false claim of ex .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

-2011 passed u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. 4. Aggrieved by the penalty order dated 11-05-2011 passed by the A.O. u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act, the assessee filed appeal before the learned CIT(A). 5. Before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee reiterated the submissions what were made before the AO which are not repeated for the sake of brevity. The assessee submitted that the assessee s main source of income has been as a working partner in Nevron Properties and Estates engaged in the business of real estate br .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ssessee was in occupation of the property and hence the assessee was paid a sum of ₹ 1,13,73,00/- by Second Land Developers Private Limited by virtue of the occupation of the property as the said new buyer wanted immediate vacant possession of the said property. The assessee executed deed of surrender of tenancy dated 12-04-2007 in favour of Second Land Developers Private Limited and was paid afore-stated ₹ 1,13,73,000/- by said Second Land Developers Private Limited to get vacant po .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ed of surrender of tenancy rights dated 12-04-2007. The assessee submitted that he was paid ₹ 1,13,73,000/- by the said Second Land Developers Private Limited, the new owner /buyer because they wanted immediate vacant physical possession of the property and since the part of premises was occupied by the assessee and hence the assessee was paid ₹ 1,13,73,000/- by Second Land Developers Limited to get immediate vacant physical possession of the property. The assessee submitted 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

t the said Second Land Developers Private Limited is no way related or connected with the assessee and the transactions are at arm s length. It was stated by the assessee before the learned CIT(A) that the A.O. acted upon suspicion, conjectures and surmises and there is no material before the AO to come to conclusion that the said Second Land Developers Private Limited paid ₹ 1,13,73,000/- for reasons other than obtaining vacant possession of the portion occupied by the assessee. It was su .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

urrender of tenancy as income from other sources instead of being charged to tax as long term capital gains voluntarily with a view to end protracted litigation with Revenue and to buy peace of mind subject to the condition that no penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act will be levied by the Revenue on the assessee. The assessee relied on several cases which are referred to by the learned CIT(A) in his appellate order dated 03-08-2012 at page 10. The ld. CIT(A) after considering the submissions of 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

nal tenant Shri Rajni C. Shah granted in his favour in the year 1995 as claimed by the assessee which were not submitted by the assessee. No electricity connection was there in the name of the assessee and no municipal taxes were paid by the assessee with respect to said property. Statement u/s 131 of the Act was recorded by the AO wherein Shri Rajni C. Shah denied having given any sub-tenancy to the assessee. The assessee also did not had any license obtained under Shops and Establishment Act 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

e instant case the Revenue can say that the assessee had made an incorrect claim of deduction u/s 54F of the Act which did not found favour with the Revenue but penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act is not leviable under these circumstances as per ratio of decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Reliance Petroproducts Private Limited(supra), therefore the A.O. was directed by learned CIT(A) to delete the penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act against the assessee vide appellate order da .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

gains allegedly and purportedly earned on sale/surrender of sub-tenancy rights which sub-tenancy never actually existed and was merely a colorable device adopted by the assessee to evade taxes . The ld. D.R. relied upon the order of the A.O. and submitted that enquiries were made with the BEST and BMC which revealed that the assessee did not had electricity connection in his name in the said property nor the assessee paid taxes with respect to the said property. The ld. DR submitted that 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

he year 1995 as per claim of the asssesse, wherein in the statement recorded u/s 131 of the Act, Sh. Rajni C. Shah admitted on oath that the assessee is not his sub- tenant or sub-lessee with respect to this property and he signed many documents without reading the voluminous material placed before him at the time of execution of deed of surrender of sub-tenancy executed by the assessee with Second Land Developers Private wherein the said Rajni C Shah was confirming party. It was submitted by 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

ing appellant proceedings to prove his sub- tenancy. Thus, it is absolutely wrong to say that the assessee surrendered the amount to avoid litigation and to buy peace of mind. The ld. CIT(A) deleted the penalty so levied by the A.O. by relying upon the decision of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Reliance Petroproducts P. Ltd. (2010) 322 ITR 158 by holding that the case of the assessee is squarely covered by the ratio of law laid down by the Hon ble Supreme Court while the fact of 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

ctricity such as bills etc. or payment of taxes to BMC and other contemporary documents were produced by the assessee to prove his sub-tenancy. The ld. D.R. relied on the decision of Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of Virendra K. Mehta v. DCIT [2014] 50 taxmann.com 217 (Bombay) and the decision of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of MAK Data (P) Ltd. v. CIT [2013] 38 taxmann.com 448 (SC) and submitted that it was an ex-facie bogus claim of the assessee to contend that the assessee was sub .....

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 was a surrender of sub-tenancy with respect to portion of property situated at 66, Off E. Moses Road, Lower Parel, Mumbai. The deed of surrender of tenancy dated 12-04- 2007 was a registered and stamped deed between the assessee and the buyer Second Land Developers Private Ltd. wherein the original tenant Shri Rajni C. Shah was the confirming party. It was submitted that the Second Land Developers Private Ltd. purchased the premises along with tenants and sub- tenants wherein the assessee 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

ted wherein Sh Rajni C. Shah was confirming party . The assessee handed over physical possession to Second Land Developers Private Limited on signing of deed of surrender of tenancy dated 12-04-2007 on receipt of consideration of ₹ 1,13,73,000/- for surrender of tenancy. Shri Rajni C. Shah, the original tenant granted permission to the assessee in the year 1995 to occupy the portion of the premises . It was submitted that there was no written sub-tenancy agreement entered with Sh. Rajni 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

onnection in the name of the AO installed at the said premises and to confirm the payment of taxes by the assessee. The learned counsel of the assessee submitted that it is irrelevant whether electricity bills or taxes were paid by the assessee or not to adjudicate the existence of sub-tenancy in favour of the assessee by Sh. Rajni C. Shah in the year 1995 with respect to the said property as it was an oral grant of permission by the said Sh. Rajni C. Shah in favour of the assessee to occupy and .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rrender of tenancy rights. The ld. Counsel drew our attention to the revised computation of income which is placed at paper book page 27. It is submitted that the assessee has not admitted that the amount was not received on surrender of tenancy which now is offered to be taxed under the head income from other sources instead of being taxes as income from long term capital gain as the assessee did not have contemporary evidences to prove sub-tenancy . It is submitted that the withdrawal of claim .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

) 241 ITR 124(MP) 4. UOI v.Rajasthan Spinning and Weaving Mills (2009) 224 CTR1(SC) The learned counsel reiterated the submissions as were made before the authorities below and relied upon the orders of learned CIT(A). 9. In the rejoinder, the ld. D.R. submitted that no addition was made by the Revenue u/s 68 of the Act rather the income is assessed to tax under the head Income from other sources instead of income from long term capital gains which was claimed by the assessee in return of income .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

inst the quantum assessment order passed by the AO u/s 143(3) of the Act, which has attained finality. Thus, the ld DR prayed that penalty levied by the AO u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act be confirmed and order of the learned CIT(A) be set aside. 10. We have considered the rival contentions and perused the material placed on record including the case laws relied upon by both the parties. We have observed that the assessee is partner in a partnership firm M/s Nevron Properties and Estates which is engag .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

wherein Mr Rajni C. Shah, the original tenant of the property was confirming party . The assessee claimed deduction u/s 54F of the Act on afore-stated long term capital gains earned by the assessee. It is the contention of the assessee that the assessee was sub-tenant in the afore- stated property w.e.f. year 1995 wherein the original tenant of the said property Mr. Rajni C. Shah permitted him orally to occupy and use the office premises situated at afore-stated property to do business together .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

edly gave him permission and allowed him to occupy and use the said premises till the date of execution and registration of deed of surrender of tenancy on 12-04-2007. Further,it is the submission of the assessee that he did not have any written sub-tenancy agreement with Mr. Rajni C. Shah who was the original tenant of the said premises/property and said Mr. Rajni C Shah orally granted him permission in the year 1995 to occupy and use the afore-stated premises to do business together . The 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

aim of the assessee of treating the consideration of ₹ 1,13,73,000/- received on surrender of tenancy as income from long term capital gains. The assessee submitted that he has executed written, stamped and registered deed of surrender of tenancy on 12-04-2007 in favour of new owners M/s Second Land Developers Private Limited wherein Mr. Rajni C Shah is confirming party and payment of ₹ 1,13,73,000/- was made by said new owner M/s. Second Land Developers Private Limited to 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

and BMC denied of having any sub- tenancy registered in the name of the assessee , since the year 1995 till date of execution of deed of surrender of tenancy dated 12-04-2007. The AO recorded statement of Mr. Rajni C. Shah u/s 131 of the Act during assessment proceedings whereby Mr. Rajni C Shah stated on oath that neither he nor his family members have created any sub-tenancy or sub-lease in favour of the assessee and with respect to signing as confirming party of deed of surrender of tenancy 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

sub-tenancy to be treated as income under the head income from long term capital gains and filed revised computation of income before the AO wherein the said amount was declared as income from other sources on surrender of tenancy rights. The assessee earlier made an claim of deduction u/s 54F of the Act of ₹ 1,13,73,000/- from income from long term capital gains on surrender of tenancy which was withdrawn as now the income is offered for taxation as income from other sources and obviously .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Weborney. The assessee submitted that he is voluntarily surrendering his afore-stated claim in order to avoid long and protracted litigation with Revenue and in order to buy peace of mind, provided no penalty be levied against the assessee u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. Thus, in nut-shell the primary onus was on the assessee in quantum proceedings to prove his sub-tenancy which the assessee miserably failed to do so. The AO proceeded to levy penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act while the learned CIT(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

wer Parel, Mumbai from M/s Leach and Weborney. The assessee did not have any contemporary evidence to prove his sub-tenancy which was stated to be granted to him in the year 1995 by Mr. Rajni C. Shah, the original tenant and also agreement of sub-tenancy is stated to be an oral agreement wherein Mr. Rajni C. Shah granted him permission to occupy and use the said office premises since the year 1995 till the year 2007.Thus, the assesee in quantum proceedings failed to discharge primary onus cast u .....

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 said premises since 1995 to 2007 including agreement for grant of sub-tenancy and other relevant contemporary evidences to support and prove his sub-tenancy . In-fact the assessee who is an estate broker vide his own admission has stated that he handled the deal of sale of the said property whereby the Second Land Developers Private Ltd. purchased the said property from M/s Leach and Weborney. The said Rajni C. Shah on a statement recorded on oath u/s 131 of the Act denied to have granted .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

der of tenancy from being treated as income from long term capital gains and agreed to now bring to tax the said receipt as income under the head income from other sources and also withdrew his claims of deduction u/s 54F of the Act . The assessee did not challenge the assessment framed by the AO u/s 143(3) of the Act in appellate proceedings and accepted the said assessment order passed by the AO which was passed after the assessee withdrew his afore-stated claims. In our considered view based .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

so that the said amount of alleged consideration can be brought to tax under the head Income from long term capital gains on which the assessee can purportedly claim deduction u/s 54F of the Act. Immediately on being confronted and cornered by the Revenue after detailed enquiry and investigations conducted by the Revenue as set out above wherein the Revenue brought cogent material on record to disprove the story of sub- tenancy set-out by the assessee , the assessee withdrew his claims before t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ients of Section 271(1)(c) of the Act are fulfilled which in the instant case were duly fulfilled by the Revenue by conducting detailed enquiry and investigations to bring on record cogent incriminating material to disprove the story of sub-tenancy set up by the assessee. Once the primary onus cast on the revenue in penalty proceedings is discharged, the burden shift on the assessee to bring on record bonafide explanations to support the claim filed by the assessee in the return of income filed .....

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 cornered by the Revenue. In our considered view based on peculiar facts and circumstances of the case , it was when the assessee was confronted and cornered by the Revenue, the assessee was compelled to come out with withdrawal of his claims filed in return of income which claims were in fact camouflaged by the assessee by way of deed of surrender of tenancy dated 12- 04-2007 to claim long term capital gains and deductions u/s 54F of the Act . The contentions of the assessee that he surrendere .....

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 real transactions by using colorable and sham devices by way of deed of surrender of tenancy dated 12-04-2007 to reduce tax liability , while the fact of the matter was that the assessee was never ever holding the sub-tenancy of the said premises or so called permission from Mr Rajni C Shah since the year 1995 to occupy and use the said premises and in-fact the said premises was never in occupation/possession of the assessee since the year 1995 till 2007. The claim of the assessee made in t .....

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 assessment order framed by the Revenue u/s 143(3) of the Act in the appellate forums which was framed after claims as set out by the assesssee in return of income was withdrawn by the assessee after being cornered and confronted by the Revenue. The Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Mak Data Private Limited v. CIT (2013) 358 ITR 593(SC) has observed that voluntary disclosure does not release the assessee from mischief of penal proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act and the AO shall not be car .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

any person under this Act, - (A) Such person fails to offer an explanation or offers an explanation which is found by the Assessing Officer or the Commissioner (Appeals) or the Commissioner to be false, or (B) Such person offers an explanation which he is not able to substantiate and fails to prove that such explanation is bona fide and that all the facts relating to the same and material to the computation of his total income have been disclosed by him, then the amount added or disallowed in 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

ny explanation for concealment of particulars of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. Explanation to Section 271(1) raises a presumption of concealment, when a difference is noticed by the AO, between reported and assessed income. The burden is then on the assessee to show otherwise, by cogent and reliable evidence. When the initial onus placed by the explanation, has been discharged by him, the onus shifts on the Revenue to show that the amount in question constituted the inco .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

f of penal proceedings. The law does not provide that when an assessee makes a voluntary disclosure of his concealed income, he had to be absolved from penalty. 9. We are of the view that the surrender of income in this case is not voluntary in the sense that the offer of surrender was made in view of detection made by the AO in the search conducted in the sister concern of the assessee. In that situation, it cannot be said that the surrender of income was voluntary. AO during the course of 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

ad it been the intention of the assessee to make full and true disclosure of its income, it would have filed the return declaring an income inclusive of the amount which was surrendered later during the course of the assessment proceedings. Consequently, it is clear that the assessee had no intention to declare its true income. It is the statutory duty of the assessee to record all its transactions in the books of account, to explain the source of payments made by it and to declare its true inco .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nner or reduce it into writing. The scope of Section 271(l)(c) has also been elaborately discussed by this Court in Union of India v. Dharmendra Textile Processors [2008] 13 SCC 369 and CIT v. Atul Mohan Bindal[2009] 9 SCC 589. 11. The principle laid down by this Court, in our view, has been correctly followed by the Revenue and we find no illegality in the department initiating penalty proceedings in the instant case. We, therefore, fully agree with the view of the High Court. Hence, the appeal .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

impressed by any of these contentions. True, it is that the revenue has to prove that the ingredients or preconditions based on which imposition of penalty is permissible, are present and that is why the penalty is imposed. True, it is that the limited assistance can be derived from the quantum proceeding in such matters but one finds in the facts and circumstances of the present case, that the foundation or basis on which the assessee before us claimed the benefit was highly doubtful and questi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ad indicated and with sufficient clarity that the claim of tenancy is not genuine. The documents in relation to that claim are highly suspicious and the contents thereof cannot be believed. In meeting such a case, the assessee came forward and said that the registered agreement evidenced a genuine tenancy. Therefore, summons was issued to the landlady and in response to which her daughter appeared. She has stated that prior to demolition of the building, there were 5 tenants including one Mr. Sa .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

hed the flat in favour of the landlady. Even that version was not found to be genuine. The findings of the Assessing Officer based on the answers given and the replies furnished are reproduced at para-7 of the Tribunal's order. We are of the opinion that the Tribunal rightly held that this was a fit case for imposition of penalty. The entire explanation with regard to the tenancy rights, if surrendered has not been found to be true. Even in penalty proceedings, the assessee was not able to g .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

facts in each case. The assessee before the Hon'ble Supreme Court was Abkari contractor. The return of income was filed and disclosing a turnover and certain income. That the ingredients of the return was not accepted by the Income Tax Officer. He noticed that there are several deposits and entered in the name of certain shop-keepers. The assessee's explanation was not found to be acceptable and it came to be rejected. The books of account were also rejected. In appeal before the Appella .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

inciples that penalty is a result of quasi-criminal proceedings and the want of proof is, therefore, strict and a test different than that of assessment proceedings has to be applied. There is no dispute and no quarrel about this legal principle but whether that has been satisfied or not will have to be decided and determined in the facts and circumstances of each case. We do not find that in this case either of the authorities have deviated from this legal principle or have not invoked and appl .....

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 with the explanation (1) the law postulates that in cases referred by clause (c) and (d) in addition to the tax, if any, payable by the assessee, a sum which shall not be less than, but shall not exceed three times, the amount of tax sought to be evaded by reason of the concealment of particulars of his income or fringe benefits or the furnishing of inaccurate particulars of such income or fringe benefits, shall be payable by way of penalty. It is that clause which has been applied. We do not .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

eing not sustainable at law , while admittedly no information given in the return of income was found to be incorrect or inaccurate will not make the assessee liable to penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act as merely making an incorrect claim will not tantamount to furnishing of inaccurate particulars , while in the instant case the assessee made a wrong claim in the return of income of having sub-tenancy in the said premises while the fact of the matter in the present case before us is that the 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

pon by the assessee which was also affirmed by the Hon ble Supreme Court, the assessee surrendered the amount by filing revised return of income after persistent queries from the AO , which revised return of income was regularized by the revenue and where the asseseee contended that he surrendered the amount to buy peace and to come out of vexed litigation with the Revenue, it was held that explanation was bonafide and penalty is not exigible . This case is distinguishable as in this case of CIT .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ith cogent incriminating evidences to disprove the existence of sub-tenancy whereby the assessee was compelled to surrender the claims during assessment proceedings which were also not filed vide revised return of income. The assessee also relied upon the decision of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of UOI v. Rajasthan Spinning and Weaving Mills (2009) 224 CTR 1(SC) and in our considered view, the same is in-fact supportive to the decision taken by us to confirm/sustain the penalty in the insta .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Weaving Mills(Supra) clearly stipulates that penalty is punishment for an act of deliberate deception by the assessee with an intent to evade duty be adopting any of the means mentioned in the section i.e. fraud, collusion or any willful mis-statement or suppression of facts, or contravention of any of the provision of the Central Excise Act or of the rules made there-under . It is also pertinent to mention here that decision in the case of Rajasthan Spinning and Weaving Mills(Supra) was rendere .....

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