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

2016 (11) TMI 945 - ITAT MUMBAI

2016 (11) TMI 945 - ITAT MUMBAI - [2016] 51 ITR (Trib) 352 - Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - wrong claim of deduction under section 54F - Held that:- Only ground on which the assessee's claim of deduction 54F was disallowed was flats Nos. 103 and 104 are two separate properties. It is the claim of the assessee that these two flats are adjacent to each other and contiguous, hence, to be treated as one flat. In this regard, it is to be noted that the expression "a residential house" as provided under 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

culars of income or concealed particulars of his income. That being the case, in our view, it is not a fit case for imposition of penalty under section 271(1)(c). Accordingly, accepting the assessee's explanation, we delete the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. - Decided in favour of assessee. - I. T. A. No. 1713/Mum/2014 - Dated:- 6-5-2016 - Saktijit Dey (Judicial Member) And Rajesh Kumar (Accountant Member) For the Appellant : Sanjiv M. Shah For the Respondent : Pradeep Kumar .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s submitted, the assessee sold his old residential premises in June, 2012, and shifted to a new residential premises. He submitted, after shifting to a new residential premises, he suffered heart attack in March, 2013, and was undergoing treatment for a prolonged period. He submitted, the order passed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) though was communicated to the assessee's old residential address but since the purchaser of the flats were busy in marriage function of their son, they co .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

re submitted, the delay caused being totally unintentional and due to bona fide reasons, should be condoned. 3. The learned Departmental representative opposed the condonation of delay. 4. We have heard both the parties on the issue of delay in filing the present appeal. After perusing the cause of delay, as explained in the delay condonation petition which is supported by affidavit, we are satisfied that there is a reasonable cause for delay in filing the appeal. Consequently, condoning the del .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nt in which was claimed as deduction under section 54F against the long-term capital gain received on sale of shop. The Assessing Officer observed, the assessee was already the owner of one residential house at Andheri. As per section 54F, the assessee can be eligible for deduction under section 54F, if he invested in one more residential house. However, the assessee had purchased two flats, hence, deduction 54F is not allowable. He also observed that as per section 71, the assessee was required .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

9;s explanation observing that in the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee agreed that he has wrongly claimed deduction under section 54F. He, therefore, concluded that as the assessee has concealed particulars of income and furnished incurred particulars, he is liable for penalty under section 271(1)(c) which was quantified at ₹ 1,60,651. Being aggrieved of penalty order so passed, the assessee preferred an appeal before the learned Commissioner (Appeals). 6. The learned Commiss .....

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 assessee being contiguous should be treated as one flat, hence, conditions of section 54F are not violated. 8. The learned Departmental representative, on the other hand, relied upon the reasoning of the Assessing Officer and the learned Commissioner (Appeals). 9. We have considered the submissions of the parties and perused the material available on record. Undisputedly, the basis for imposition of penalty under section 271(1)(c) is, the assessee has wrongly claimed deduction under section 54 .....

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