TMI Blog2020 (4) TMI 655X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s not even mentioned his express intention to disallow those expenses, thus penalty on the said reason is not imposable. In the case of DCIT Vs. Kulwant Singh [ 2019 (4) TMI 1287 - ITAT CHANDIGARH] wherein it has categorically been held that when all the facts with regard to the income were declared in the original return itself, then it cannot be taken as a case of concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. Where the satisfaction of the ld.AO while initiating the penalty proceedings u/s.271(1)(c) with regard to filing of inaccurate particulars of income while making claim of brokerage charges and it was not believed by the ld.AO and the ld.AO has considered the same as cash credit income u/s.68 - we find support ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssary on the basis of submissions to b made at the time of personal hearing. ITA No.11/SRT/2017 for A.Y.2010-11: 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee had claimed brokerage income in his Return of Income, but in the absence of furnishing of details as called-for by the ld.Assessing Officer(AO), the said income was treated as unexplained cash credit u/s.68 of the Income Tax Act. Consequently, penalty proceedings were also initiated for filing inaccurate particulars of income. Later on, after providing an opportunity of hearing to the assessee, order of penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act was passed thereby imposing penalty. 4. Being aggrieved with the order of imposing penalty, the assessee preferred appeal before ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s wherein the assessee placed reliance on the judicial pronouncements which reproduced below: The word 'particulars' must mean the details supplied in the return, which are not accurate, not exact or correct, not according to truth or erroneous. In the instant case, there was no finding that any details supplied by the assessee in its return were found to be incorrect or erroneous or false. Such not being the case, there would be no question of inviting the penalty under section 271(1)(c). A mere making of the claim, which is not sustainable in law by itself will not amount to furnishing of inaccurate particulars regarding the income of the assessee. Such claim made in the return cannot amount to the inaccurate particulars. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the other hand, the ld.Departmental Representative(DR) relied upon the orders passed by the Revenue Authorities. 8. We have heard both the Counsels and perused the material placed on records, judgments cited by the parties as well as orders passed by the Revenue Authorities. From the facts of the present case, we noticed that merely because the assessee could not substantiated his stand of earning income on account of brokerage charges, the same was treated as cash credit u/s.68 of the Act by the ld.AO and penalty was imposed for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. We notice that while computing the amount of tax in the assessment order, the ld.AO increased assessed income and reduced net profit as per profit and loss account. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he ld.AO while initiating the penalty proceedings u/s.271(1)(c) with regard to filing of inaccurate particulars of income while making claim of brokerage charges and it was not believed by the ld.AO and the ld.AO has considered the same as cash credit income u/s.68 of the Income Tax Act. Thus, we find support from the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Petro Products [2010] 322 ITR 158 wherein it has categorically been held that mere making of a claim, which is not sustainable in law by itself will not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars regarding the income of the assessee and such claim made in the return cannot amount to be inaccurate particulars. Thus, considering the totality of the facts and ci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
