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

M/s Hillview Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Versus The DCIT, Chandigarh

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Unexplained expenditure u/s 69 - Held that:- It is admitted fact that it is based upon seized document and explanation of the assessee was not found sastisfactory. The assessee explained that it is rotating capital investment by Shri J.C.Bansal which had already been declared before Settlement Commission in the amount of ₹ 30,70,000/-. However, when break-up of the same was given, amount of ₹ 94,500/- did not find mention in the same declaration. The assessee .....

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 Act against the assessee on this addition. - Addition on account of undisclosed income - Held that:- Receipts produced on record clearly show that almost all the payments which were due upon Shri Rahul Chhabra have been received by assessee in subsequent years. Therefore, there is no question of any amount of ₹ 5 lcs paid by Shri Rahul Chhabra in cash. Thus, the assessee is able to explain at this stage that no amount of ₹ 5 lacs was paid in cash by Shri Rahul Chhabra, otherwis .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

D/2016 - Dated:- 8-2-2017 - Shri Bhavnesh Saini, Judicial Member And Ms. Annapurna Gupta, Accountant Member Appellant by : Shri Sudhir Sehgal Respondent by : Shri S. K. Mittal ORDER Per Bhavnesh Saini, JM Both the appeals by the same assessee are directed against different orders of ld. CIT(Appeals)-3 Gurgaon dated 06.01.2016 for assessment years 2007-08 and 2009-10, challenging the levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. 2. We have heard ld. Representatives of both the pa .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

.07.2009 on Bansal Group of cases by Investigation Wing, Chandigarh. The assessee was one of the person/concern covered under section 132 of the Act. 5. As regards unexplained expenditure of ₹ 94,000/- under section 69C of the Act, it is observed by the Assessing Officer that as per page 81 of Annexure A-1 seized from the office premises of the assessee i.e. SCO 2474, Sector 22, Chandigarh. This was hand written sheet showing certain transactions in the name of Shri Ashwani Tayal, Shri Man .....

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 amount represents undisclosed income of Shri J.C.Bansal and has been declared in his hands before Settlement Commission was not acceptable. The seized document pertains to the assessee and this was undisclosed expenditure of the assessee. The Assessing Officer after discussion made a perusal of the chart produced before him noted that ₹ 94,500/- was not shown as incurred out of additional income surrendered during assessment year 2007-08. The assessee, thus, failed to explain the seized .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

herefore, of the view that assessee has concealed the income and furnished inaccurate particulars of income willfully. 6. As regards undisclosed income of ₹ 5 lacs, it is observed by the Assessing Officer that as page 57 of Annexure A-2 seized from business premises was a hand written page showing transaction in cheques and cash received from Shri Charanjit Lal and Shri Rahul Chhabra. The assessee was asked to give details of these transactions and also to reconcile the same with the regul .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

; 12,89,760/-. Consequently, a sum of ₹ 5 lacs was treated as undisclosed income of the assessee. The ld. CIT(Appeals) confirmed the addition and penalty proceedings were also initiated against the assessee. 7. The assessee at the penalty proceedings filed written statement which is noted in the penalty order in which the assessee briefly explained the same facts that since cheques of Shri Rahul Chhabra were continuously dishonoured, therefore, he has offered ₹ 5 lacs as cash and sec .....

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 the Act. 8. The assessee challenged the penalty order before ld. CIT(Appeals), detailed submissions were made, however, ld. CIT(Appeals) did not accept contention of the assessee because both the above additions have been confirmed by ITAT and are based upon seized document. The ld. CIT(Appeals) noted that assessee did not disclose all the facts in the return of income and burden upon assessee has not been discharged and penalty can be imposed even under deeming additions under section 68/69 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tment by Shri J.C.Bansal and he had already disclosed ₹ 30.70 lacs therefore, penalty need not be imposed. As regards the addition of ₹ 5 lacs, copy of the seized paper is filed at page 6 of the Paper Book. Copies of the allotment letter and cheques dishonoured in the name of Shri Rahul Chhabra are filed at page 1-5 of the Paper Book. He has submitted that in the seized paper, no cash receipt of ₹ 5 lacs has been mentioned. He has submitted that assessee did not file proof of d .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nce payment due against Shri Rahul Chhabra was ₹ 7,51,340/- which have been recovered from Shri Rahul Chahbra later on in a sum of ₹ 7,46,000/- in different amounts starting from 22.12.2010 to 12.11.2014. Copies of the receipts issued by the assessee in the name of Shri Rahul Chhabra are also placed on record. He has, therefore, submitted that almost all the payments which were due as per calculation on left side of the seized paper have been received and properly accounted for in 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

9;ble Supreme Court in the cases of Dharmendra Textile & Processors 306 ITR 277 and Atul Mohan Jindal 317 ITR 1 on the proposition that penalty is strictly a civil liability. 10. We have considered rival submissions. As regards first addition of ₹ 94,500/-, it is admitted fact that it is based upon seized document and explanation of the assessee was not found sastisfactory. The assessee explained that it is rotating capital investment by Shri J.C.Bansal which had already been declared .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

, Explanation-1 to Section 271(1)(c) of the Act is clearly attracted in the case of the assessee. The authorities below were, therefore, justified in levying the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act against the assessee on this addition. We, therefore, dismiss this ground of appeal of the assessee. 10(i). As regards levy of the penalty on the addition of ₹ 5 lacs, the quantum addition has been confirmed by the Tribunal. The Tribunal considered the seized document but did not accept c .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ce of any evidence on record, quantum addition of ₹ 5 lacs was upheld. The ld. counsel for the assessee, however, produced on record the allotment letter in the name of Shri Rahul Chhabra alongwith schedule of payment of ₹ 15,36,100/- and also filed copies of receipts which were cancelled on dishonour of the cheques. Copies of the dishonoured cheques are also produced on record. The ld. counsel for the assessee, therefore, submitted that the total amount as per seized paper 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

en accounted for in the books of account of the assessee. These receipts now produced on record clearly show that almost all the payments which were due upon Shri Rahul Chhabra have been received by assessee in subsequent years. Therefore, there is no question of any amount of ₹ 5 lcs paid by Shri Rahul Chhabra in cash. Thus, the assessee is able to explain at this stage that no amount of ₹ 5 lacs was paid in cash by Shri Rahul Chhabra, otherwise there was no reason to make balance 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

unal but it was confirmed because assessee failed to reconcile the entries that no amount of ₹ 5 lacs have been received in cash from Shri Rahul Chhabra. Since quantum and penalty proceedings are distinct and independent and assessee is now able to explain that due amount was paid subsequently as noted above, therefore, we are of the view it is not a fit case of levy of penalty on the addition of ₹ 5 lacs. We may note that the findings in this order shall be relevant to the penalty 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

4,80,000/-. 14. Brief facts relating to the issues are that during the course of search, page Nos. 59 to 67 of Annexure A-2 were seized from the office of the assessee. The said documents were confronted to Shri Lalit Jindal whose statement was recorded on 29.07.2009 i.e. after the search. Documents tabulated contain entries relating to receipt of payment from Shri Budhiraja family and letter dated 10.08.2008 addressed to Shri Lalit Jindal which contained entries relating to M-1 Plaza. In reply, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

books of account which in turn have been surrendered to the tune of ₹ 2 Crores. The scanned copy of page 67 is available at page 3 of the assessment order which is letter written to Shri Lalit Jindal on 10.08.2008 with regard to investment in various properties. The said document talked about the discussion with Mr. Jindal and total amount receivable from Mr. Jindal at ₹ 1,28,89,362/- against which ₹ 13 lacs had already been received from Mr. Jindal and the balance receivable 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

tter (e) 61, 60 and 62 are reproduced at pages 8, 9 and 10 of the assessment order. The said three pages i.e. 61, 60 and 62 of the seized documents were in respect of transactions at (e). Page 59 of A-2 is scanned and is placed at page 11 of the assessment order. The Assessing Officer noted from all these pages that on each page, the assessee has recorded the total amount and the balance amount after adjustment which are due to him and his family members. The Assessing Officer confronted 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

und it was not acceptable and made an addition of ₹ 1,28,68,362/- holding that page 67 was nothing but summary of pages 59 to 66. 15. The addition was challenged before ld. CIT(Appeals) and ld. CIT(Appeals) considered this issue in detail and held that Assessing Officer having added ₹ 1,28,69,362/- was not correct as the same was an outstanding amount. However, at page 15 Para (i) of the assessment order, amount of ₹ 59,43,115/- was stated i.e. ₹ 46,43,115/- + ₹ 13 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

duce Shri Monga before the Assessing Officer and did not accept contention of the assessee that figures given in the seized paper were notional figures and assessee failed to co-relate entries contained in the seized paper. The Assessing Officer, after considering the explanation of the assessee at the penalty stage noted that explanation of the assessee is not acceptable and assessee has concealed income on the basis of seized paper and levied the penalty on this addition. 16. As regards undisc .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ficer on this addition also, did not accept explanation of the assessee and noted that explanation of the assessee is after thought and cannot be relied upon. The assessee furnished inaccurate particulars of income as well as concealed the income. Therefore, on both these additions, penalty was levied by Assessing Officer. 17. The ld. CIT(Appeals) on the same reasoning as have been given in assessment year 2007-08, confirmed the levy of penalty and dismissed appeal of the assessee. 18. We have 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

o be paid by Shri Sunil Bansal and he made same declaration but assessee failed to substantiate the same explanation and it was found that undisclosed income was higher as against disclosed on these seized papers, therefore, addition of ₹ 4,80,000/- was made. 18 (i) Ld. Representatives of both the parties submitted that this issue is same as have been considered in assessment year 2007-08 on the addition of ₹ 94,500/-, therefore following the reasons for decision for same year, we 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

me of his wife or against some customer or friend. In the seized letter dated 10.08.2008, Shri Anil Monga has given approximate and notional figures. All the investments made with the assessee which he wanted that assessee should re- purchase the same. No amount have been paid by assessee to Shri Anil Monga. The addition is made of the amount payable on which no inquiry have been conducted on the confirmation filed by Shri Anil Monga. The addition is confirmed because Shri Anil Monga was not pro .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

able in the facts and circumstances of the case. 19(i) On the other hand, ld. DR relied upon orders of authorities below. 20. We have considered rival submissions. All the seized papers are noted and reproduced in the assessment order. The letter dated 10.08.2008 contained certain details with regard to the approximate figure of the property booked with the assessee. In the seized paper, it is stated that amount of ₹ 13 lacs have been received and balance was stated to be payable. This let .....

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 names of other persons are also mentioned in most of the loose slips like Anil Behal, Sanjay Kapoor, Vineet Marwah. Shri Anil Monga explained that the properties have been booked with the assessee for which payments have been made and he has made a request to the assessee to re- purchase the properties which were booked with the assessee. The term premium/amount payable have been given in the seized paper to show that the notional value of the property which may be adjusted against the amo .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Anil Monga. However, none of the seized papers speak of the same thing. The additions have been confirmed because Shri Anil Monga was not produced before authorities below and that the entries are not co-related. Shri Lalit Jindal, Director of the assessee in his explanation also answered that this letter was written by Shri Anil Monga giving details of investments made in various projects. Shri Anil Monga mentioned the expected price of the properties held by him. All the payments received from .....

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     ↓  

Highlight: Notification regarding GST rate for branded cereal, pulses and flour

News: Notification regarding GST rate for branded cereal, pulses and flour

Highlight: Anti-dumping duty on import of bus/truck tyres from China

Highlight: Cabinet approves Extension of time period of the Scheme "Special Industry Initiative for J&K" (Sll J&K) - Udaan

Highlight: Non-payment of service tax - maintenance and repair charges - appellants had knowingly and deliberately shown the repair charges as job work charges to mislead about their taxability - demand confirmed.

Highlight: BAS - execution of the project of smart card for vehicle registration – implementing the SOC-VRC project - The fact that the Government has outsourced some part of the work and paid certain consideration for such outsourced work, does not make the activity subject to service tax.

Forum: Input tax credit

Forum: Cess paid instead of SGST

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

Circular: Amendments in Hand Book of Procedures 2015-20 –reg.

News: Cabinet approves Extension of time period of the Scheme "Special Industry Initiative for J&K" (Sll J&K) - Udaan

Highlight: Constitution of National Anti-profiteering Authority (NAA) under GST-reg. - Trade Notice

Highlight: Amendments in Hand Book of Procedures 2015-20 –reg. - Various amendments are made in Chapter-4 of Hand Book of Procedures 2015-2020.

Forum: GST rates on mobile recharge business

Circular: Constitution of National Anti-profiteering Authority (NAA) under GST-reg.

Forum: import purchase

Highlight: Sharing of expenses - BAS - promotion of business of group companies - sharing of expenditure for common facilities cannot be treated as service by one to another in such arrangement.

News: RBI Reference Rate for US $

Forum: 3B mistake

Article: Credit of unsold stock [Section 140(3)] - Actual Credit as well as Notional Credit - Part-I - GST Transitional provisions

Circular: Certain Clarifications sought on Construction Services provided in the Real Estate Sector – reg.

News: Anti-dumping duty on import of bus/truck tyres from China

News: Fast-track GST refund, else ₹ 65K cr may be stuck: Exporters

Highlight: It is open to the Settlement Commission to use best judgment in arrival of the figure. Nonetheless it has to explain the manner in which the best judgment figure has been arrived at by the Settlement Commission - HC

Highlight: Deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) - advances given to societies - in the absence of legal right of the assessee in the said society the amount advanced cannot be treated as deemed income.

Highlight: When electrical installations are treated as plant and machinery the depreciation has to be allowed @ 25% as per provisions contained u/s 32

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)

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.



|| 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