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 →

2019 (6) TMI 395

..... HELD THAT:- A perusal of assessment order shows that penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) qua disallowance u/s. 14A has been initiated by mentioning both the limbs of section 271(1)(c). Thereafter, while passing penalty order dated 05-03-2015 the Assessing Officer again mentioned both the limbs of section 271(1)(c) Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of T. Ashok Pai Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax [2007 (5) TMI 199 - SUPREME COURT] has held, “Concealment of income’ and ‘furnishing of inaccurate particulars” carry different connotations. Expression ‘concealment of income’ and ‘furnishing inaccurate particulars of income’ cannot be used interchangeably. ‘Concealment of income’ connotes .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

..... inafter referred to as the Act ). 2. Shri Prayag Jha appearing on behalf of the assessee submitted that the assessee filed its return of income for the impugned assessment year on 25-09-2008 declaring total income of ₹ 19,41,040/-. The assessee is engaged in the business of wind power generation and trading of land. The assessee is also engaged in land development activities. In return of income for the impugned assessment year the assessee had claimed deduction u/s. 80IA(4) in respect of income from power generation. The Assessing Officer in scrutiny assessment proceedings inter alia made disallowance qua excessive deduction claimed u/s. 80IA(4) of the Act. Apart from above disallowance of ₹ 1,77,857/- u/s. 14A of the Act was a .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

..... submitted that the assessee in return of income failed to disclose interest income of ₹ 1,77,857/- received from Patan Urban Co-operative Bank Ltd., therefore, penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act has been rightly levied. 4. We have heard the submissions made by representatives of rival sides and have perused the orders of authorities below. The assessee has challenged levy of penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) on the ground of ambiguity in specifying the charge u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. A perusal of assessment order shows that penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) qua disallowance u/s. 14A has been initiated by mentioning both the limbs of section 271(1)(c). The relevant extract of the Assessing Officer where penalty has been initiated reads as under : Further, .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

..... ome earned in the return of income during the relevant period. On the other hand expression furnishing inaccurate particulars of income signifies where the assessee has furnished particulars of income but the information/documents furnished are false/wrong/incorrect or erroneous. 7. The Hon ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Manjunatha Cotton and Ginning Factory (supra) has held : 61. The Assessing Officer is empowered under the Act to initiate penalty proceedings once he is satisfied in the course of any proceedings that there is concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of total income under clause (c). Concealment, furnishing inaccurate particulars of income are different. Thus the .....

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 ||