2014 (12) TMI 1338

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e of natural justice. Ld. CIT(A) is in error to confirm the same. 2. That the penalty imposed by AO on the basis of ITAT order dated 12.2.2010, according to which, income assessed by ITAT is deemed income, on which penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) is not permissible. The assessee furnished all the particulars of her income and furnished information therefore, the assessee cannot be held guilty of furnishing inaccurate particular of her income. As decided Supreme Court Judgment, Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Reliance Petroproducts Pvt. Ltd. 322 ITR 158. Hence, penalty imposed of Rs. 90,000/- is arbitrary, unjust and against the verdict of Supreme Court Judgment and CIT(A) is in error in confirming the same. 3. That the assesee has right to add .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 0.1.2013, assessee is in appeal before us. 5. Ld. Counsel of the assessee contended that during the assessment proceedings, the assessee furnished complete details of shares sold by the assessee, which includes copy of bills, copy of share certificate and complete details of bank. It was further submitted by the Ld. Counsel of the assessee that the particulars furnished by the assessee was neither inaccurate, nor there was any concealment of particulars of income. 5.1 Ld. Counsel of the assessee further stated that the assessee has filed voluntarily her return of income showing long term capital gain which later on has not been accepted by the Revenue Authorities. Therefore, he requested that the penalty in dispute is not leviable, in vie .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... assessee. 7.1 We find that section 271(1)(c) postulates imposition of penalty for furnishing of inaccurate particulars and concealment of income. On the facts and circumstances of this case the assessee's conduct cannot be said to be contumacious so as to warrant levy of penalty. 7.2 In this regard, we find that Hon'ble Apex Court decision in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Petro Products Ltd. in Civil Appeal No. 2463 of 2010 is squarely applicable in the present case of the assessee wherein it was held as under:- "A mere making of the claim, which is not sustainable in law, by itself, will not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars regarding the income of the assessee. Such claim made in the Return cannot amount to the inaccurate par .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X