Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s Subhash Chander Sewa Devi Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward 3 (4) , Amritsar

2017 (6) TMI 450 - ITAT AMRITSAR

Penalty u/s 271(l)(c) - short disclosure of interest on Income tax refund - Held that:- Admittedly there is a mistake committed by the assessee in not adding interest on the refund to his sources of income. There is no disputing the fact that the tax payer duly and diligently must necessarily in its return of income disclose all avenues of his income. The assessee in its defence has consistently maintained that the mistake has occurred as the information in regard to the said interest was not av .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

lter and as per the assessment order, is shown to be “trading in wood”. There is nothing on record to show that it was an act of concealment nor is there any fact on record that there was a deliberate filing of inaccurate particulars of income. No doubt the assessee is expected to show due diligence and is mandatorily required to disclose all avenues of income before filing of his return. The mistake in the peculiar facts as considered in the decision of Apex Court in the case of Price Waterhous .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

itsar, pertaining to 2012-13 assessment year on the following grounds : 1. That the Id. CIT (A) is not justified in upholding the assessment order having failed in discharging the onerous duty as an appellate authority for passing a order which is bad in law and as per facts of the case going to prejudice the. appellant.. 2.. That the Id. CIT (A) is not justified in upholding the imposition of penalty u/s 271(l)(c) on account of short disclosure of interest on Income tax refund of ₹ 139234 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

assessee firm could not assess the exact amount of interest on refunds because due to mismatch, the assesssee received short refunds from the actual refunds due. The assessee firm received refunds of ₹ 19.95 Lac against the refund dues for the A.Y. 2008-09, 2009-10 and 2010-11. The detail of refund dues and refunds received by assessee firm are detailed as under: Asstt. Year Refund Reed. Refund Due 2010-11 901180.00 1013790 2009-10 953290.00 814770 2008-09 140580.00 576630 Total 1995050.0 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he CIT(A) in the penalty proceedings has been that there was no concealment or filing of inaccurate particulars of his income. In the facts of the preset case, it was submitted that the assessee was ignorant about the interest received on the income tax refund as no intimation was available with the assessee. This submission, it was submitted, is a matter of fact and has not been rebutted by the AO or the CIT(A). Even as per the 26AS form of the assessee firm as downloaded from the system, at 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

notice of the assessee. The tax demand, it was submitted of ₹ 58,690/- was accordingly immediately paid. The following details of Refund and Interest credited available with the assessee which had been relied upon before the CIT(A) extracted at page 4 of the impugned order was referred to. Same is reproduced hereunder: Asstt Year Refund Recd. Interest as per FT System Interest shown in Difference P&l 2010-11 901180.00 89309.00 89309.00 2009-10 953290.00 138516.00 106219.00 32297.00 200 .....

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 the impugned order submitted that the CIT(A) has dismissed the assessee's claim holding that it was the statutory duty/responsibility on the part of the assessee before filing the return of income to check the incomes accrued and received by him during the previous year which were to be shown in the return of income. In the year under consideration, it was submitted the assessee has admittedly received refund to the tune of ₹ 2,54,114 /- and has only showed ₹ 1,14,880/-. Since .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

f the assessee downloaded from the system, no reference about interest on income tax refund was available thereon. The said submissions have been rejected by the CIT(A) on the ground that it is the duty on the part of the assessee to check and recalculate his avenues of income and the assessee should have checked and calculated that the refund so claimed is more than 10% of the tax determined. Onus was upon the assessee and thus, it was submitted that the penalty has correctly been upheld. 4. 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

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version