TMI Blog2018 (8) TMI 1918X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed particulars of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income particularly when the assessee did not claim any refund of the advance tax paid on such income. Assessee made the payment of tax before filing of the return and not claimed refund of the same. The non-inclusion of the said income was explained as due to inadvertent omission and Bonafide mistake. Therefore, the explanation tendered by the assessee with the supporting facts and details falls in the Clause-B of Explanation-2 to section 271(1)(c) of the Act. Hence we do not find any error or illegality in the impugned order of the ld. CIT (A). - Decided against revenue - ITA No. 455/JP/2017 - - - Dated:- 7-8-2018 - SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM AND SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADA ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not shown in the computation of income whereas such income was shown in the capital account and balance sheet of the assessee. Since the tax due on the said income was already paid by the assessee, therefore, the assessee revised its computation of income and offered the same. The AO accordingly made an addition of ₹ 1,51,50,000/- to the total income of the assessee and consequently initiated the penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. The AO passed a penalty order under section 271(1)(c) on 21st May, 2015 and levied the penalty of ₹ 51,49,485/- being 100% of tax sought to be evaded. The assessee challenged the levy of penalty before the ld. CIT (A) and contended that when the assessee offered the income in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... submitted that the assessee had disclosed the additional income during the survey and also paid the advance tax on the said income prior to the end of the financial year which itself show the bonafide of the assessee even if the said income was not included in the computation of income of the assessee. Moreover the entries were passed in the accounts and the surrendered income was duly shown in the capital account and balance sheet which were filed along with the original return of income itself. Thus due to inadvertence and bonafide mistake, the said income could not be included in the return of income filed by the assessee on the last date of limitation. The ld. A/R has thus submitted that there is no attempt by the assessee to either co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CIT (A) has adjudicated this issue at pages 8 and 18-19 as under :- I have gone through assessee s submission and AO s findings. From the facts it is clear that though the assessee had paid all the taxes due on the additional income offered to tax during the Survey proceedings but had not disclosed it in the computation of Income separately. The tax was paid by March 2011 and remained with the department till the time the return was taken up for scrutiny in November, 2014, when the fact of non disclosure of the additional income was brought up by the AO by issuing a show cause notice. On the basis of the decisions relied upon courts have formed a view that a. Penalty is not an automatic consequence of addition to i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... course of assessment proceedings show the intention of the assessee to be Bonafede and in my humble view, duly covered under the opinion of the courts as discussed above in this order. In the absence of bringing out any deliberate and malafide intent behind the omission or alleged concealment the penalty of ₹ 51,49,485/- levied by the AO is not found to be sustainable and is directed to be deleted. This ground of appeal is treated as allowed. Accordingly, the facts as discussed and considered by the ld. CIT (A) has not been disputed before us by the revenue that the assessee made the payment of tax before filing of the return and not claimed refund of the same. The non-inclusion of the said income was e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
