Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Forum Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News What's New Calendar Imp. Links Database More...
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Ms. Pushpavati Khushalchand Mehta C/o. Sujan Impex Pvt. Ltd. Versus Income Tax Officer-20 (2) (1) , Mumbai

Levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) - change of head of income - the income shown under the head STCG by the assessee is to be assessed under the head income from ‘Business and Profession’ - Held that:- The assessee had declared the income arising out of purchase and sale activity in shares and securities as STCG as against business income assessed by the AO. It is seen that the assessee had also filed written submissions before the authorities below that she was under the bona fide belief 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

ng the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Bennett Coleman & Co. Ltd. (2013 (3) TMI 373 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT) and of the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Mita J. Jhaveri (2017 (1) TMI 682 - ITAT MUMBAI) we hold that since there is only a change of head of income from ‘STCG’ as declared by the assessee to ‘business income’ as held by the AO and no evidence brought on record that the assessee’s claim was not bona fide, we delete the penalty of ₹ 1,18,735/- .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

x Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') for A.Y. 2008-09. 2. The facts of the case, briefly, are as under: - 2.1 The assessee filed her return of income for A.Y. 2008-09 on 30.03.2009 declaring total income of ₹ 46,99,360/- under the heads of income from house property, short term capital gains (STCG), long term capital gains (LTCG) and income from other sources . The case was subsequently taken up for scrutiny. In the course of assessment proceedings the Assessing Officer (AO) observed 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

1 of the Act simultaneously while completing the order of assessment under section 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 26.11.2010. 2.2 Penalty proceedings were taken up by the AO by issue of show cause notice. The assessee s submissions dated 26.06.2013 and 16.09.2013 sought dropping of penalty proceedings submitting, inter alia, that penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act cannot be levied for reclassification of STCG income declared by the assessee as business income by the AO and in this 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

ome. The AO rejected the assessee s contentions and proceeded to levy penalty of ₹ 1,18,735/- under section 271(1)(c) of the Act in the order dated 23.03.2013. 2.3 On appeal, the learned CIT(A)-31 vide the impugned order dated 04.01.2016 upheld the AO s action in levying the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act for A.Y. 2008-09 holding as under at para 5.10 thereof:- 510. I have gone through the facts marshaled during the assessment and penalty proceedings and observed that the appel .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

imposed u/s 271(1) (c). Facts of the case decide whether a belief could be treated as bona fide or not. In other words it can safely be held that if an appellant, disregarding all the relevant facts and circumstances, interprets a section that suits its interest then such interpretation cannot be held bona fide belief. AO's view that appellant consciously attempted to reduce tax liability to the extent of ₹ 1,18,735/- being the difference between tax on Short Term Capital Gain of 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

36, Mumbai [hereinafter referred to as the "Ld. CIT(A)"] erred in passing the order dated 05.01.2016 confirming the penalty levied by the Ld. A.O. in penalty order dated 23.09.2013 passed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as "the Act"]. The Appellant strongly objects to the levy of penalty confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A)-36. 2. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of ₹ 1,18,735/- The Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the Ld. A.O. in le .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

raves leave to add, alter, rescind or amend any of the above grounds of appeal. The only issue raised in this appeal is against the order of the learned CIT(A) for confirming the levy of penalty by the AO under section 271(1)(c) of the Act for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. 3.2 When the case was called for hearing, none was present for the assessee, but the learned D.R., who was present, fairly conceded that the assessee s appeal is to be allowed in view of the decision of the 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

rising from dealings in shares and securities and also from house property and income from other sources . The AO was of the view that the income from STCG of ₹ 8,19,450/- arising from investment activity as declared by the assessee is to assessed under the head business income and after assessing the same accordingly in the order of assessment dated 26.11.2010, simultaneously initiated penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act for furnishing inaccurate particulars 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

that the assessee s proposition was that its activity of dealing/investment in shares and securities are investment activity and not business activity as held by the AO/CIT(A) and that there was only a change of head of income from STCG to business income and therefore there was no furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income as is being sought to be made out. From the details on record before us, we too observe that there is only a change of head of income by the AO from STCG income on accoun .....

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 head of income and in the absence of any evidence to show that the assessee s claim was not bona fide, penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income/concealment of income was to be deleted. At para 3 of its order the Hon'ble Bombay High Court held as under: - 3. So far as question (ii) is concerned, the respondent- assessee had claimed premium on redemption of debentures as income from capital gains. Whereas the assessing officer held 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

egard to the fact that the respondent- assessee had disclosed that the amount received as premium on redemption of debentures in its computation of income. Further, the Tribunal records that it is not the case of the department that the respondent-assessee had concealed any particulars of income or furnished inaccurate particulars of income by stating incorrect facts. The assessing officer considered the said premium received on redemption of debentures to be taxable under the head income from 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

3.3.3 The aforesaid decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Bennett Coleman & Co. Ltd. (259 CTR 383) (Bom) on similar fact situation was followed by a Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Mita J. Jhaveri in ITA No. 6210/Mum/2012 dated 30.08.2016. We find that in the case on hand, the assessee had declared the income arising out of purchase and sale activity in shares and securities as STCG as against business income assessed by the AO. It is seen that the ass .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

  ↓     Latest Happening     ↓  

Forum: GST return filing software online | Easy GST compliance management

Forum: Input credit of gst paid on urd

Forum: 3B mistake

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

Forum: Input tax credit

TMI Note: Capital Gain - transfer of right in the land or transfer of land itself - addition u/s 50C - Harassment to the honest tax payers

Highlight: Option to avail composition scheme under GST by electronically filing an intimation in FORM GST CMP-02 and FORM GST ITC-03 upto 30-9-2017 - See Rule 3(3A)

Forum: GST on Notional rent

Forum: GST ON SALES PROMOTION

TMI Note: Does ICDS apply for the purposes of computing exemption u/s 11 to 13.

Highlight: Voluntary Reporting of Estimated Current Income and Advance Tax Liability - CBDT issues draft notification

TMI Note: Certain ICDS provisions are inconsistent with judicial precedents. Whether these judicial precedents would prevail over ICDS.

Highlight: Provisions of ICDS shall prevail w.e.f. AY 2017-18 to the transactional issues dealt therein over earlier judicial pronouncements.

Notification: Levy of anti dumping duty on New/unused pneumatic radial tyres with or without tubes and/or flap of rubber (including tubeless tyres) having normal rim dia code above 16 originating in, or exported from China PR

News: Voluntary Reporting of Estimated Current Income and Advance Tax Liability

TMI Note: In case of conflict between ICDS and other specific provisions of the Income-tax rules, 1962 governing taxation of income like rules 9A, 9B etc. of the Rules, which provisions shall prevail.

TMI Note: Does ICDS apply to computation of Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) u/s 115JB of the Act or Alternate Minimum Tax (AMT) u/s 115JC of the Act.

TMI Note: Where a term has not been defined under ICDS, nor under the Act, but has different interpretations given to it by the courts in tax cases, and in ICAI Accounting Standards, which interpretation would prevail while interpreting ICDS.

TMI Note: Whether the provisions of ICDS apply to a non-resident who claims the benefit of a double taxation avoidance agreement (DTAA).

TMI Note: In case any of the ICDS provisions is contrary to a circular or press release issued by the CBDT, which would prevail over the other.

TMI Note: ICDS-I requires disclosure of significant accounting policies and other ICDS requires specific disclosures. Where is the taxpayer required to make such disclosures specified in ICDS.

Notification: Income Computation and Disclosure Standards (ICDS) - New ICDS to be effective from AY 2017-18

News: RBI Reference Rate for US $

Highlight: GST - Detention of goods under transport - discrepancy in documents - the statutory provisions provide a mechanism for adjudication following detention of goods including for the provisional release thereof pending adjudication - HC

Highlight: Reassessment - first few paragraphs of the assessment order dealt with objections and disposed of accordingly - Unfortunately, the manner in which the AO has decided the issue is wholly unsustainable in law - HC

Highlight: Business expenditure u/s 37 - liquidated damage - breach of contract terms - Expenditure was not incurred for any purpose which is an offence or which is prohibited by law - cannot be disallowed - HC

Highlight: Valuation - inclusion of reimbursement of expenses - managing participation of clients in certain mela, fairs, promotional activities etc. - They are liable to service tax on the gross amount received - They cannot restrict their tax liability to only agency commission

Highlight: TDS liability - ITAT confirmed the liability - We do not see how it is possible for us to uphold the order of the Tribunal and when it purports to decide two Appeals of the Revenue by single paragraph conclusion - HC

Highlight: Reopening of assessment - sufficiency of material available with the AO to form a belief that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment - bogus purchases - seller refused to respond - notice would not be interfered with - HC

Highlight: Exemption u/s 11 - education activities - transport and hostel facilities surplus cannot be considered as business income of the assessee society

News: Draft Notification for insertion of new rule 39A in the Income-tax Rules, 1962 – comments and suggestions-reg.

Highlight: Genuineness of labour wages expenses, embroidery charges, fabrication expenses etc. - getting work done through small workmen who do not have any permanent place of residence - disallowance of ad hoc expenditure deleted.

Highlight: Project import - Since the goods were never used for the purpose for which it was imported, the actual user condition has been violated - Redemption fine and penalty imposed.

Highlight: Penalty u/s 112 (a) - CHA - Lack of due diligence and failure to take more precautions can not, by itself, bring in penal consequences

Highlight: Import of services - GST - The fact that those services were received outside India will not change the fact that the services have been paid for by the beneficiary appellant, who is located in India. - Demand confirmed.

Notification: SEZ for IT/ITES at Madhurwada Village, Visakhapatnam District in the State of Andhra Pradesh - denotified.

Highlight: Merely because payment is received in Indian rupee, it cannot be said that payment against export has not been received in convertible foreign exchange.

Highlight: Merely vehicle numbers was not mentioned on the invoices cannot be the reason to deny Cenvat Credit

Highlight: Extension of time limit for submitting the declaration in FORM GST TRAN-1 under rule 120A of the Central Goods and Service Tax Rules, 2017 - Circular

Circular: Extension of time limit for submitting the declaration in FORM GST TRAN-1 under rule 120A of the Central Goods and Service Tax Rules, 2017

News: Auction for Sale (Re-issue) of Government Stocks

Article: TDS APPLICABILITY ON GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS UNDER GST (Under Section 51 of the CGST Act, 2017)

News: Manmohan takes potshots at note ban, 'hasty' rollout of GST

News: GST on petrol, diesel requires wider discussion: Nitish

Article: WHEN CAN ONE TAKE ITC FOR RCM CASES?

Notification: TDS liability under Section 51 of CGST, 2017 come into force w.e.f. 18-9-2017 - Persons liable to deduct TDS from payment made or credited to the supplier of taxable goods or services specified

Notification: Central Goods and Services Tax (Seventh Amendment) Rules, 2017

Notification: Seeks to extend the last date for filing the return in FORM GSTR-3B for the months of August to December, 2017

Circular: Filing of Special Leave Petition against Orders of Hon'ble High Courts staying Collection of Tax under GST- reg.

Highlight: Exemption u/s 54F - LTCCG - once entire net consideration is invested, the absence of completion certificate cannot be a ground to deny the benefit of deduction.



|| 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