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 →

M/s. MS Shoes East Ltd. Versus. DCIT, Circle-6 (1) , New Delhi

2016 (11) TMI 355 - ITAT DELHI

Penalty under section 271(1)(c) - Held that:- Assessee made entire disclosure in respect of its claim of expenditure and no false or incorrect particulars have been filed by the assessee. The assessee has also filed explanation for the claim made by it and which is not a malafide. Similarly, the assessee furnished all particulars in respect of claim of interest of ₹ 36 lacs related to loan of ₹ 2 crores from the Indian Air Force Benevolent Fund (IAFBF), however, the interest was disa .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n the record. We find that the assessee has disclosed all facts regarding interest and other claims in the audited accounts and complete disclosure was made in notes to accounts and full explanation was furnished during the assessment proceedings and the explanation furnished are found to be bonafide. Also during the period the director of the company was under arrest and the company did not have any qualified persons to compile the return as per law and, therefore, even the interest written bac .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

sioner of Income-tax (Appeals) for assessment year 2001-02, wherein he has sustained the penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 by the Assessing Officer. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under: i. The provisions of section 271(1)(C) read with section 275 are not applicable at all. ii. The CIT(Appeal) has erred in confirming the penalty levied by the A.O. iii. The assessee has neither concealed nor filed inaccurate particulars of its income, thus 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

ellant sought to evade tax by making wrong claims. viii. The aforesaid grounds of appeal are independent and without prejudice to one another. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, or vary any of the aforesaid grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing. 2. The facts in brief are that the assessee filed return of income on 29/10/2001 declaring total loss of ₹ 1,02,604/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and the assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the 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

essee written back interest of ₹ 78,17,48,715/- as income under section 41(1) of the Act. The assessee requested that this income should be excluded as remission is taxable only, if the allowance or deduction in respect of such amount was allowed in earlier years. Since the assessee was not allowed deduction of interest, no profit was taxable under section 41(1) of the Act. After considering the facts of the case for the year under consideration, the Assessing Officer held that ₹ 60, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ies and directed the Assessing Officer to reassess the income. In the re-assessment order, the Assessing Officer retained the addition already made by the earlier Assessing Officer and made further addition of ₹ 1,02,85,876/- and initiated penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(C) of the Act. Before the Assessing Officer, the assessee pleaded that assessed loss was higher than the loss as returned, thus, it was evident that assessee company did not make any attempt to evade tax, which is .....

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 computation of total taxable income and, therefore, he levied penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act on 30/06/2010 at an amount slightly higher than the amount of the tax sought to be evaded, which was computed at ₹ 15,69,63,000/-. Before the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), the assessee pleaded that all the facts in respect of disallowance/addition were duly disclosed in the return of income or the financial statement appended to the return of income and additions 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

Income-tax (Appeals), however, did not accept the contention of the assessee and upheld the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the grounds as reproduced above. 3. The learned counsel of the assessee filed paper book containing pages 1 to 127 and submitted that as against the returned loss of ₹ 1,02,604/-, the income was finally assessed at a loss of ₹ 22,56,51,125/- in the assessment order under section 254/143(3 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

essing Officer and the explanation furnished by the assessee has not been found false. He further submitted that explanation furnished is bonafide. The learned counsel also submitted the circumstances under which return of income was filed. In view of above facts, the learned counsel requested that the penalty levied might be deleted. 4. The learned Senior Departmental Representative, on the other hand, relied on the findings of the lower authorities. 5. We have heard the rival submissions and p .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

has made following additions/disallowances: 1. Interest due to bank ₹ 19,71,86,237/- 2. interest disallowances on loan from IAFBF ₹ 36,00,000/- 3. loss on machinery ₹ 3,29,27,354/- 4. bad debts ₹ 6,20,000/- 5. loss of a stock and machinery ₹ 14,35,85,117/- 6. expenses disallowed estimates basis ₹ 1,02,85,876/- 6. Penalty in respect of expenses of ₹ 1,02,85,876/- disallowed on estimate basis was deleted by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), .....

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 assessee is whether the quantification of the interest liability took place during the year or not, but the assessee made entire disclosure in respect of its claim of expenditure and no false or incorrect particulars have been filed by the assessee. The assessee has also filed explanation for the claim made by it and which is not a malafide. Similarly, the assessee furnished all particulars in respect of claim of interest of ₹ 36 lacs related to loan of ₹ 2 crores from the Indian .....

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 in the notes to account to the balance sheet (Schedules 16 - note No. 6) and on the basis of the details/explanations provided during assessment proceeding, the Assessing Officer made disallowance. The Assessing Officer has not unearthed any new fact from his independent sources which could lead to furnishing of inaccurate particulars by the assessee. Similarly, all details of bad debt of ₹ 6,20,000/- were available on the record. Further, It is evident from the fact of the case mentione .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

l facts regarding interest and other claims in the audited accounts and complete disclosure was made in notes to accounts and full explanation was furnished during the assessment proceedings and the explanation furnished are found to be bonafide. 8. We find that in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax, Ahmedabad Vs. Reliance Petroproducts (P) Ltd, 322 ITR 158 (SC), Apex Court has held that when the detail supplied by assessee are not found to be incorrect or erroneous or false there were no qu .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ate statement, copy or transcript". We have already seen the meaning of the word "particulars" in the earlier part of this judgment. Reading the words in conjunction, they must mean the details supplied in the Return, which are not accurate, not exact or correct, not according to truth or erroneous. We must hasten to add here that in this case, there is no finding that any details supplied by the assessee in its Return were found to be incorrect or erroneous or false. Such not bei .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

on to income which does not form part of the total income under the Act. It was further pointed out that the dividends from the shares did not form the part of the total income. It was, therefore, reiterated before us that the Assessing Officer had correctly reached the conclusion that since the assessee had claimed excessive deductions knowing that they are incorrect; it amounted to concealment of income. It was tried to be argued that the falsehood in accounts can take either of the two forms; .....

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