9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (12) TMI 254X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 009 admitting total income of Rs. 24,325/-, which was processed u/s 143(1) prima-facie accepting the returned income. Subsequently, the case was selected for scrutiny under CASS and after hearing the case, the assessment was completed by assessing the total income at Rs. 1,12,02,476/- by disallowing exemption claimed u/s 54 of the IT Act. 2.1 In the assessment order, an amount of Rs. 1,12,02,475/- was added to the returned income on account of disallowance of exemption claimed u/s 54, which represents the amount of income sought to be evaded by reason of the wrong claim of deduction by furnishing inaccurate particulars of her income in the return originally filed. The AO observed that the assessee had offered house property income from two ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-l, Guntur, dismissing the appeal filed by the Appellant is erroneous, illegal and unsustainable in law. 2. The Commissioner (Appeals) erred in sustaining the penalty of Rs. 26,00,000/- levied by the Assessing Officer. 3. The Commissioner (Appeals) failed to appreciate that the Appellant made a claim under section 54 F of the Act under bona fide impression that the joint-ownership in respect of the second house will not be considered as independent ownership. 4. The Commissioner (Appeals) failed to appreciate that the Appellant has not furnished inaccurate particulars while making claim under section 54 F of the Act, and at any rate the Commissioner (Appeals) himself has ruled out the conc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... For these and other grounds that may be urged at the time of hearing, it is prayed that the Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to allow the appeal." 5. Before us, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee has disclosed all material facts and, hence, there is no issue of concealment on her part. Further, he submitted that the assessee has made a wrong claim u/s 54F, due to ignorance of law, which cannot be said to the concealment of particulars of income and, hence, penalty proceedings cannot be attracted in assessee's case. 6. The ld. DR, on the other hand, relied on the orders of revenue authorities. 7. Considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record. A glance of provision of section 271(1)(c) would s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
