Tax Management India. Com
                        Law and Practice: A Digital eBook ...

Category of Documents

TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Case Laws Acts Notifications Circulars Classification Forms Manuals SMS News Articles
Highlights
D. Forum
What's New

Share:      

        Home        
 

TMI Blog

Home List
← Previous Next →

2018 (10) TMI 723

erm capital gainí - Held that:- once addition on which penalty was imposed u/s 271(1)(c) has been deleted, then there is no reason to levy penalty for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income - No penalty - Decided against the revenue. - I.T.A No.2946/Mum/2017 - 5-10-2018 - Shri Joginder Singh (JUDICIAL MEMBER) And Shri G Manjunatha (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) For The Appellant : Shri Nitin Waghmode For The Respondent : None ORDER Per G Manjunatha, AM : This appeal filed by the revenue is directed against the order of the CIT(A)-33, Mumbai dated 05-02-2017 and it pertains to AY 2010-11. The revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal:- 1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in d .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

e head Income from long term capital gain as claimed by the assessee as against the AO s treatment under the head Income from business . 3. The assessee has filed appeal against penalty order passed by the AO u/s 271(1)(c) before the CIT(A). Before the CIT(A), the assessee has filed order passed by the ITAT deleting addition made by the AO by treating surplus from sale of property at Badlapur under the head, Income from business or profession . The Ld.CIT(A), after considering relevant submissions of the assessee and also by considering the order passed by the ITAT held that once the addition based on which penalty u/s 271(1)(c) was imposed, has been deleted, there remains no ground for levy of penalty to survive. Accordingly, he deleted pe .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

ture of Badlapur Land ignoring the accounting entries in books of accounts then it borne out that: a) The assessee had acquired land at Badlapur in the year 1988 to 1990 and there was no development and construction activity undertaken by the assessee on Badlapur land from last 20 years. No builder/businessman keeps the land undeveloped for such a long period of time. b) The assessee has capitalised the interest cost and other expenses to the Cost of Badlapur Land, which is inconsistence with treatment to a Capita! Asset. c) The capitalization of interest cost is also in conformity with Provisions of Income Tax Act applicable to a Capital Asset. d) Capitalisation of interest cost is neither in conformity with the accounting of inventories p .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

ity of an expenses rather than mere entry in books of accounts. in this regard we piace reliance upon the following decisions: a) CIT Vs. Hitashi Estates Ltd [313 ITR 393](Deihi) b) CITVs. Pai Provision Stores [203 Taxman 196](Kamataka) c) Fort Propones Pvt. Lto Vs. CIT [203 ITR 232] (Bombay) 13. in view of the above facts and circumstances as well as legal position, we direct the AO to is treat the gains on sale of Badlapur Land as LTCG in place of business income. 10. Once the addition based on which penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act was imposed, has been deleted, there remains no ground for penalty to survive. Hence penalty of ₹ 84,49,0447- imposed by the AO u/s.271(1)(c) is deleted. 4. None appeared for the assessee. Therefore, we .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

 

 

← Previous Next →

 

 

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

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.
|| Blog || Site Map - Recent || Site Map ||