TMI Blog2012 (4) TMI 712X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in upholding the penalty at ₹ 14,471/- on account of differential income offered to the extent of ₹ 47,288/- while filing the return u/s. 153A without appreciating the fact that the appellant himself had filed return u/s. I 53A disclosing the additional income based on entries already recorded in the books. 2. The learned Commissioner of income-tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the penalty without appreciating the fact that there was no concealment of income as required u/s. 271(l)(c) and the assessee himself had tiled the revised return which was accepted by the Assessing Officer in toto. Further the additional income was offered suo-moto and there was no material fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e assessee as well as the ld DR and considered the relevant material on record. The ld AR has submitted that there is no material found or seized during the course of search action on the basis of which the addition could have been made in the case of the assessee. It is a case of voluntary disclosure of income by the assessee in the return of income filed in response to notice u/s 153A. He has further submitted that it is a case of revised return of income, which was accepted by the Assessing Officer without making any addition; therefore, no penalty can be imposed. He has relied upon the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Suresh Chandra Mittal reported in 251 ITR 9(SC); decision of the H ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mitted by the assessee in the return filed u/s 153A because of some incriminating material showing undisclosed income found or seized during the search and seizure action. The Assessing Officer has not pointed out any such material or information on the basis of which the additional income would have been added to the income of the assessee. It is a simple case of admitting the income declared by the assessee in the return filed u/s 153A. The Assessing Officer has discussed the difference in the total income u/s 139 and u/s 153A in para 7 of the assessment order, which is identical for all the three years, except the quantum of income. The relevant part of the assessment order for the AY 2002-03 read as under: 7. The difference in th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... if the claim of the assessee not allowable under the provisions of law, the same cannot lead to the conclusion that the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of income or concealed any income, when the claim itself is not bogus. 5.3 It is clear from the record that the additional income admitted in the return filed u/s 153A is not because of some bogus or an absolutely wrong claim; but because of some error or omission in the return of income and in respect of the claim u/s 80L/80D/80CC of the I T Act which is in the nature of voluntary offer of the income by the assessee and would not amount to concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. Further, the AO has not discussed or given any finding that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
