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 →

Shri Dilip D. Jain Versus ACIT, Central Circle-3, Nashik

Levy of penalty u/s.271(1)(c) - Returns filed u/s.153A - as result of search and seizure operation, some incriminating documents were found and seized relating to transaction of purchase and sale of plots, shops etc. - on-money offered by the assessee - Held that:- The satisfaction as recorded by AO which is evident from the assessment order itself does not establish the case of Revenue against the assessee that it is liable for levy of penalty for concealment under which limb i.e. for concealme .....

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 and lack of notice being issued in making the assessee aware of exact charge against him, hence the same is quashed. The penalty proceedings completed pursuant to such notice are vitiated and the same are held to be invalid. - The assessee had offered additional income on account of on-money on sale of plots. The Assessing Officer had accepted the same and had initiated penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. The CIT(A) during the course of appellate proceedings relating 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

enalty proceedings have been initiated on a different footing and the CIT(A) reverses the same and holds the same to be loans received by the assessee, there is change in opinion and basis for levy of penalty for concealment varies. In such circumstances, there is no merit in levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act and there is no merit at all in levying the penalty @ 150%. Accordingly, we allow the claim of assessee even on merits. Thus, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee 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

-04-2014 common for A.Yrs. 2003-04 to 2006-07. 2. In appeals the assessee has assailed the levy of penalty u/s.271(1)(c), as well as enhancing of penalty by CIT(A). Since penalty proceedings in the impugned assessment years originate from same set of facts, these appeals are takenup together for adjudication and are decided by this single order. 3. The brief facts of the case as emanating from the records are : A search and seizure action u/s.132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

fficer initiated penalty proceedings u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act read with Explanation 5A for concealing particulars of income and furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer levied penalty u/s.271(1)(c) for impugned assessment years vide separate orders of even date 24-06-2011 for concealing the particulars of income. The penalty levied for the different assessment years is as under : Assessment Year Additional income offered 2003-04 11,97,660/- 2004-05 21,04,100 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

3-04 : 1] The learned CIT(A) erred in directing levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) @ 150% of the tax sought to be evaded on the ground that the appellant had concealed its income and also misrepresented the facts of the case. 2] The learned CIT(A) erred in enhancing the penalty levied from 100% to 150% without appreciating that on the facts of the case and in law, he had no power to enhance the penalty levied by the A.O. and accordingly, the enhancement made by the learned CIT(A) is not justified at .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ace and to cooperate with the dept. and there was no evidence that the assessee had actually earned that income and accordingly, the penalty levied by the A.O. was not justified at all. 5] The learned CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that if its contention is accepted and the notings on the seize papers indicate unaccounted loans received by the assessee, in that event, there is no question of taxing such amounts in the hands of the assessee and consequently, the penalty levied should be deleted .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

question of levy of penalty simply does not arise. 8] The learned CIT(A) has erred in passing the order without considering the correct facts of the case. 9] The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or delete any of the above grounds of appeal. The assessee has also challenged the impugned order by raising an additional ground of appeal, the same reads as under : 1] The assessee submits that the penalty order passed u/s. 271(1)(c) was null and void since the notice issued by the ld. A.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

y on account of invalid notice issued u/s.274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) of the Act, as also on merits. The Ld. Authorised Representative placed on record copy of the order of Coordinate Bench in the case of Kanhaiyalal D. Jain (Supra). The Ld. Authorised Representative submitted that penalty proceedings in the case of present assessee and Kanhaiyalal D. Jain are outcome of assessment proceedings resulting from search and seizure action in the case of Chhoriya group. 6. The Ld. Authorised Representative f .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

hat penalty proceedings are initiated u/s.271(1)(c) read with Explanation 5A for concealing of particulars of income and furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. However, while passing the penalty order, the penalty has been levied only for concealing particulars of income. The Assessing Officer was not clear at the time of initiating penalty as to under what charge penalty is to be levied. The Ld. Authorised Representative submitted that the facts of the case of the assessee are identica .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

epresentative fairly admitted that the facts in the case of assessee are similar to the case of Kanhaiyalal D. Jain. 8. We have heard the submissions made by the representatives of rival sides and have perused the orders of the authorities below. Penalty u/s.271(1)(c) read with Explanation 5A is levied in the case of assessee in pursuance to the returns filed u/s.153A of the Act. A survey and seizure action was carried out in the case of Chhoriya group on 22-08-2008. Certain incriminating docume .....

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 ground of appeal raised in the case of Shri Kanhaiyalal D. Jain (Supra) are identical to the grounds raised by the assessee in the present set of appeals assailing the order of CIT(A). The Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Shri Kanhaiyalal D. Jain Vs. ACIT (Supra) has deleted the levy of penalty by observing as under : 13. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record. The issue arising in the present bunch of appeals is jurisdictional issue of levy of penalty under .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ble by the said person. The section thus requires the concerned Officer to record satisfaction in the course of any proceedings under the Act, that the person has concealed the particulars of his income or furnished inaccurate particulars of his income. After recording the satisfaction, during the course of penalty proceedings also, the concerned Officer has come to a finding that as to whether the person has concealed the particulars of his income or furnished inaccurate particulars of such inc .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

eedings and thereafter on fixation of charge, levy the penalty for such act of concealing the particulars of income. Similarly, in cases where the assessee concerned had furnished inaccurate particulars of such income, then similar exercise has to be carried out by the concerned Officer. 14. The first stage of invocation of provisions of section 271(1)(c) of the Act is the satisfaction to be recorded by the Assessing Officer, which admittedly, has to be during the course of assessment proceeding .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

shing of inaccurate particulars of income. There may be cases where there is issue of both concealment of income and furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income, based on the nature of additions, then in such cases, satisfaction and notice thereon should specify exact charge against the assessee. The charge has to be further specified while completing penalty proceedings and the Assessing Officer has to come to a conclusion as to whether it is case of concealment of income or furnishing 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

:- 59. As the provision stands, the penalty proceedings can be initiated on various ground set out therein. If the order passed by the Authority categorically records a finding regarding the existence of any said grounds mentioned therein and then penalty proceedings is initiated, in the notice to be issued under Section 274, they could conveniently refer to the said order which contains the satisfaction of the authority which has passed the order. However, if the existence of the conditions cou .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

gs and should have full opportunity to meet the case of the Department and show that the conditions stipulated in Section 271(1)(c) do not exist as such he is not liable to pay penalty. The practice of the Department sending a printed farm where all the ground mentioned in Section 271 are mentioned would not satisfy requirement of law when the consequences of the assessee not rebutting the initial presumption is serious in nature and he had to pay penalty from 100% to 300% of the tax liability. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ases may attract both the offences and in some cases there may be overlapping of the two offences but in such cases the initiation of the penalty proceedings also must be for both the offences. But drawing up penalty proceedings for one offence and finding the assessee guilty of another offence or finding him guilty for either the one or the other cannot be sustained in law. It is needless to point out satisfaction of the existence of the grounds mentioned in Section 271(1)(c) when it is a sine .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rounds other than what assessee was called upon to meet. Otherwise though the initiation of penalty proceedings may be valid and legal, the final order imposing penalty would offend principles of natural justice and cannot be sustained. Thus once the proceedings are initiated on one ground, the penalty should also be imposed on the same ground. Where the basis of the initiation of penalty proceedings is not identical with the ground on which the penalty was imposed, the imposition of penalty 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

here is concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of total income under clause (c). Concealment, furnishing inaccurate particulars of income are different. Thus the Assessing Officer while issuing notice has to come to the conclusion that whether is it a case of concealment of income or is it a case of furnishing of inaccurate particulars. The Apex Court in the case of Ashok Pai reported in [2007] 292 ITR 11 (SC) at page 19 has held that concealment of income and furnishing 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

then the notice has to be appropriately marked. Similar is the case for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. The standard proforma without striking of the relevant clauses will lead to an inference as to non-application of mind. 15. The Hon ble Karnataka High Court has laid down the proposition that the Assessing Officer is to be satisfied in the course of proceedings that there is either concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income under clause (c) to section .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

(SC), wherein at page 19 it was held that concealment of income and furnishing inaccurate particulars of income carry different connotation. Applying the said proposition, it was held that where the Assessing Officer proposes to invoke the first limb being concealment, then the notice has to be appropriately marked. Similarly, for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income, the standard proforma without striking of relevant clauses, as per the Hon ble High Court would lead to inference as to 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

ndered in CIT & Anr. Vs. Manjunatha Cotton and Ginning Factory (supra). The Hon ble Supreme Court in CIT Vs. SSA S Emerald Meadows (supra) has dismissed the Special Leave Petition. 17. The Pune Bench of Tribunal in M/s. Sai Venkata Construction Vs. Addl. CIT (supra) and in Sanjog Tarachand Lodha Vs. ITO (supra) have applied the ratio laid down by the Hon ble Karnataka High Court (supra) and held that where there is no striking off of either of limbs, then notice issued under section 274 r.w. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

cealment, then following the ratio laid down by the Hon ble Karnataka High Court, the Tribunal held that notice issued for initiating penalty proceedings were invalid and consequently penalty proceedings were invalid. 19. Similar proposition has been laid down by Kolkata Bench of Tribunal in Shri Deepak Kumar Patwari Vs. ACIT in ITA Nos.616 to 618/Kol/2013, relating to assessment years 2007-08 to 2009-10, order dated 03.02.2016 and it has been further held that the provisions of section 292B of .....

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 by the assessee before us. 20. The learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue placed heavy reliance on the ratio laid down by the Hon ble Bombay High Court in CIT Vs. Smt. Kaushalya (supra). In the facts of the case before the Hon ble Bombay High Court, the Hon ble High Court quashed the penalty levied for assessment year 1967-68 as the same was imposed without affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. In respect of other two years where there was non-striking of 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

ding in the notice impaired or prejudiced the right of assessee of reasonable opportunity of being heard. The jurisdictional High Court deliberated upon the provisions of section 274 of the Act which contained principle of natural justice of the assessee being heard before levying penalty. It also held that mere mistake in the language used or mere non-striking of inappropriate portion could not itself be invalidated the notice. It was held that the entire factual background would fall for consi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ent order was made and where the assessee had no knowledge of exact charge of Department against him as in the notice not only there was use of word or between the group of cases but there was use of word deliberately also. The Hon ble High Court held that notice clearly demonstrated non-application of mind on the part of Assessing Officer. The vagueness and ambiguity in the notice had also prejudiced the right of reasonable opportunity to the assessee since he did not know of exact charges he h .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ight of opportunity of hearing of the assessee as contemplated under section 274 of the Act, then such notice is invalid. 22. Now, coming to the facts of the case before us, wherein search and seizure operations were carried out on Chhoriya group of concerns on 22.08.2008 and declaration of ₹ 11.44 crores was made in the hands of whole group for various years. Consequent to the notices issued under section 153A of the Act for various years, different entities filed the return of income for .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

urnished inaccurate particulars of income and is liable to levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) r.w.s. Explanation 5A of the Act. The notice is to be issued to the assessee under section 274 of the Act. Before issuing such notice, satisfaction has to come out from the proceedings going on before the Assessing Officer. The perusal of assessment order passed in the present case reflects that the Assessing Officer while initiating proceedings has recorded satisfaction as to the assessee has furn .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

part has not been struck off. While completing penalty proceedings also, the Assessing Officer makes reference to both the limbs i.e. concealment of income and furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income and in the final, levies penalty for concealment of income. 23. However, the question which is raised before us by way of additional ground of appeal is root of start of the proceedings i.e. recording of satisfaction and the issue of notice, which has been challenged by the assessee to be inv .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

is not aware of exact charge against him, the ambiguity in the notice issued under section 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) of the Act by not striking of portion which is not applicable, prejudice the right of reasonable opportunity to the assessee, as he was not made aware of exact charge he had to face. It is a clear-cut case of concealment since the assessee had offered additional income pursuant to search carried out at its premises. It is not the case of furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income 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

in present case, in the assessment order itself while recording satisfaction for initiating proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act, exact charge of the Department against the assessee is not clear. The Assessing Officer records the satisfaction for initiating penalty proceedings on both the counts i.e. concealment of income and furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. The Hon ble Bombay High Court had also upheld the quashing of penalty proceedings for assessment year 1967-68 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

notice under section 274 of the Act on such vagueness and ambiguity makes such notice invalid and proceedings thereafter are to be quashed. 25. The Hon ble Supreme Court in T. Ashok Pai Vs. CIT (supra) had held as under:- 23. Section 271(1)(c) remains a penal statute. The rule of strict construction shall apply thereto. The ingredients for imposing penalty remain the same. The purpose of the Legislature that it is meant to be a deterrent to tax evasion is evidenced by the increase in the quantum .....

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 satisfaction has to be recorded by the Assessing Officer before initiating penalty proceedings as to under which limb the case of assessee falls. In the present set of facts, the satisfaction as recorded by the Assessing Officer which is evident from the assessment order itself does not establish the case of Revenue against the assessee that it is liable for levy of penalty for concealment under which limb i.e. for concealment of income or for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. 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

ware of exact charge against him, hence the same is quashed. The penalty proceedings completed pursuant to such notice are vitiated and the same are held to be invalid. 27. Now, coming to the merits of case, the assessee had offered additional income on account of on-money on sale of plots. The Assessing Officer had accepted the same and had initiated penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. The CIT(A) during the course of appellate proceedings relating to section 271(1)(c) 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

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     Latest Happenings     ↓  

News: Notification Issued For GST Actionable Claim On Branded Food Products

News: GST Refund - Blockage of Working Capital of Exporters - earlier also there was a normal blockage of funds for a period of 5-6 months at least

News: Clarification about Transition Credit - ₹ 1.27 lakh crore of credit of Central Excise and Service Tax was lying as closing balance as on 30th June, 2017 - claim of credit of ₹ 65,000 crore is not unexpected

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

Article: MISTAKES IN DRAFTING

Forum: Duty Drawback- Urgent

Highlight: The Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 2017 and All Industry Rates (AIRs) of Drawback related changes -reg. - Circular

Highlight: The definition of "subsidiary company" or "subsidiary" u/s 2(87) of the Companies Act, 2013 shall come into force w.e.f. 20-9-2017

Highlight: Central Government notified the All Industry Rates of Duty Drawback Schedule w.e.f. 1.10.2017 - Notification

Notification: All Industry Rates of Duty Drawback Schedule w.e.f. 1.10.2017

Circular: Investment by Foreign Portfolio Investors in Corporate Debt Securities Review

Notification: Exemptions on supply of services under UTGST Act

Notification: Rates for supply of services under UTGST Act

Notification: Exemptions on supply of services under IGST Act

Notification: Rates for supply of services under IGST Act

Notification: List of Exempted supply of services under the CGST Act

Notification: Rates for supply of services under CGST Act

Highlight: Acceptance of deposits by companies from its members - conditions relaxed in case of Specified IFSC Public company and a private company - Rule 3 amended

Notification: Rate of exchange of conversion of the foreign currency with effect from 8th September, 2017

News: Tax Payers Advised To Confirm Identities Of Income Tax Search Authorities

Notification: Amendment in Appendix 3 (SCOMET items) to Schedule- 2 of ITC (HS) Classification of Export and Import Items 2012

Forum: GST Invoice

Notification: The Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 2017

Circular: The Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 2017 and All Industry Rates (AIRs) of Drawback related changes -reg.

News: GST implementation smoother than expected: Jaitley

Forum: GST - TRAN1 - filed - Data uploaded with Remarks Processed with Error - Not coming in Electronic credit ledger - need suggession guidance

Forum: 3B mistake

Forum: Input tax credit

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

Forum: Due date of Filing TRAN-1

Highlight: Diversion of income at source - Joint venture agreement - 97% of the receipt transfer to M/s TRG Industries (P) Ltd. - scope of the agreement - it is diversion by overriding title - not taxable in the hands of assessee - HC

Highlight: Expenditure on eligible projects or schemes u/s 35AC - After 01.04.2017 the legislature desired to withdraw such deduction. - The Union legislature was competent to introduce such amendment - HC

Highlight: Transfer of trading assets at cost price, the profit component also stood transferred to the outgoing Directors, which otherwise belonged to the Company - the fact that AO has made the addition in the hands of the Directors would not make any difference - additions confirmed - HC

Highlight: The interest u/s 234B of the Act cannot go beyond the stage of S.245D(I) before the Settlement Commission - HC

Highlight: Galvanized iron pipe is a different commercial commodity than a iron pipe, therefore the activity of galvanization in our considered opinion amounts to manufacture - Deduction u/s 80-IB allowed - HC

Highlight: Penalty u/s 271C - non deduction of TDS on interest paid to sister concerns in terms of Section 194A - Levy of penalty confirmed - HC

Highlight: Disallowance of interest - reference to section 179 - The legislature has also recognised, that the doctrine of lifting of veil in the matter of tax dues is to be applied to prevent fraud etc. and not where the company has suffered despite its normal bona fide function. - HC

News: RBI Reference Rate for US $

Notification: Amendment in Notification No. S.O. 3118(E), dated the 3rd October, 2016

Highlight: Discount on ESOP to be allowed as business expenditure u/s 37(1), during the years of vesting on the basis of percentage of vesting during such period, subject to upward or downward adjustment at the time of exercise of option.

Notification: Central Government appoints the 20th September, 2017 as the date on which proviso to clause (87) of section 2 of the Companies Act 2013, shall come into force

Notification: Companies (Restriction on number of layers) Rules, 2017

Highlight: Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - additional income disclosure - surrender of income post survey u/s 133A - he disclosure made by the assessee is voluntary in nature, in the revised return - no penalty

Highlight: Reopening of assessment - notice u/s 148 issued on the directions of JCIT / CIT - a perusal of reasons for initiating reassessment proceedings clearly show that they are against the sprit of provisions u/s 147

Highlight: MAT - Adjustment to book profit - computation u/clause (f) of Explanation-1 to section 115JB(2) is to be made without resorting to the computation as contemplated u/s 14A r.w.Rule 8D of I.T. Rules.

Highlight: Addition on account of alleged suppression of service value received - the addition made simply believing the Form 26AS will be an arbitrary exercise of power which cannot be sustained

Notification: Exempts intra state supply of heavy water and nuclear fuels from DAE to NPCIL

Notification: Seeks to amend notification No. 12/2017-UTT(R) to exempt right to admission to the events organised under FIFA U-17 World Cup 2017

Notification: Seeks to amend notification No. 11/2017- UTT(R) to reduce CGST rate on specified supplies of Works Contract Services

Highlight: Liability to pay duty on import of software - Though no authorization was given by the appellant to DHL, it is an undisputed position that the software has, in fact, been ordered by the appellant and have been delivered to them by DHL - the appellant is to be considered as the importer



|| 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