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

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-3 Ahmedabad Versus Shree Ram Corporation

2016 (10) TMI 499 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT

Penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) - assessee failure to submit accurate particulars of the income - Tribunal quashed the penalty observing that when the return of income was accepted as it is, there was no question of thereafter, imposing the penalty - Held that:- The assessee itself was never subjected to search or survey, Revenue could also have relied on explanation 5 or 5A as the case may be of section 271 to levy penalty. Even though the income has been disclosed in the return filed subsequently, sect .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tted no error. - Decided against revenue. - Tax Appeal No. 77 of 2016 - Dated:- 19-7-2016 - Akil Kureshi And A. J. Shastri, JJ. Mr Nitin K Mehta, Advocate for the Appellant Mr B S Soparkar, Caveator for the Opponent ORDER ( Per : Honourable Mr. Justice Akil Kureshi ) 1. Leave to place correct annexures on record. 2. Revenue is in appeal against the judgement of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 9.6.2015 raising the following questions for our consideration : (A) Whether the Hon'ble ITA .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ribunal. The Tribunal made the following observations : 4. We have heard both sides and persued the case file. There isno factual dispute involved in this case. The Revenue seeks to treat the impugned onmoney receipts of ₹ 2.5 crores admitting in the course of search and declared in the return (supra) as concealment and furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. We reiterate that the 'search' is dated 06012011 i.e. within the relevant accounting period. And the assessee'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

(1)(c) explanation 5A instead of explanation 5 applies to search conducted on or after 162007. Be that as it may, the assessee has filed return admitting onmoney receipts as its income. The deeming fiction of concealment stipulated therein is not attracted accordingly. We follow the hon'ble jurisdictional high court's view and delete the impugned penalty. The assessee's arguments on merits succeed. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties it now emerges that the assessee was n .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Forum
what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| 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