TMI Blog2022 (9) TMI 600X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Assessee had already closed down its business and therefore, could not file the part documents as required by the AO, however, from the documents produced, it is apparently clear that required details with regard to the purchase price/value of the property was available before the authorities belowand even also we find the claim made by the Assessee as bona fide and therefore cannot be termed as dishonest or mala fide, hence we are of the considered view that in facts and circumstances and the documents available on record as stated above, no penalty is leviable . Even otherwise wealso do not find any material/reason or justification for levy of penalty and affirmation thereof. Consequently, the penalty under challenge is deleted. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No. 7640/Del/2019 - - - Dated:- 9-9-2022 - Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Accountant Member And Shri N.K. Choudhry, Judicial Member For the Appellant : Sh. Anil Jain, Ld. CA For the Respondent : Sh. Ravi Kant Choudhary, Ld. Sr. DR ORDER PER N.K. CHOUDHRY, J.M. This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 19.07.2019, impugned herein, passed by the learned Commissioner of I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uting the capital gain/loss, made the addition of Rs.78,95,407/-{Rs.32,87,521/- which was claimed as short term capital loss + Rs.46,07,886/- (Rs. 110,00,000/- -Rs. 63,92,114/-) } as capital gain. 2.3 The Assessing Officer also initiated the penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act, qua the addition for filing inaccurate particulars of income. Before the Assessing Officer, during the penalty proceedings, the Assessee claimed that during the assessment stage, the Assessee had already closed down its business and therefore, complete record for the assessment year under consideration was not traceable by the Company, due to which the same could not be produced due to time barring assessment proceedings. The Assessee in bona fide manner, considering all the documentary evidence as available with it during the time of filing return of income, has filed the same after calculating the short term capital gain which has also been recorded in audited books of accounts of the Assessee company and that non-traceability of those documentary evidences at this stage after few years cannot be considered as furnishing of inaccurate particulars of the income by the Assessee. 2.4 The A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sfaction in the assessment order. The penalty was also imposed towards the disallowance of Rs. 4,778/- as difference in income as per ITR and computation by appellant. It appears that appellant has not agitated this addition before the appellate form, thereby accepting the additions so made. 5.2 During appellate proceedings, in ground no. 1, it was contended by the appellant, as reproduced that AO has erroneously imposed the penalty and disputed the additions made, mentioning that the purchase price and other subsequent payments are duly reflected in the books and therefore, no inaccurate particulars have been furnished. The appellant also relied upon various judgments to emphasis that the disallowance cannot be construed as furnishing inaccurate particulars of income, merely because the appellant could not produce any document. 5.3 It is clear from the assessment order and subsequent submission in appeal that appellant is not in possession of the relevant documents to substantiate the cost and other expenditure thereon. In fact the appellant itself has stated that due to the closer of business, the appellant could not submit the documents as not available. In this regard ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rder dated 29.06.2017, imposed the penalty of Rs.24,41,157/- on the basis of addition of Rs.79,00,185/- (78,95,407/- + 4778/-). 5.1 The Assessee before us demonstrated (as appears from paper book which was available before the authorities below as per certificate of the Assessee) that the Assessee has shown the amount of Rs.91 lacs with regard to purchase price of property i.e. LG 24 DLF South Point, Gurgaon as on 01.04.2009, 31.03.2010 and upto 01.04.2011 and thereafter made the addition in the value of property to the tune of Rs.12,83,987/- during the F.Y. 2011-12 and shown the cost of property to the tune of Rs.1,03,83,987/- as on 31.03.2012. 5.2 Further, the Assessee also drew our attention to page No. 10 and 11 of the paper book wherein the amount of Rs.50 lacs as on 23.02.2008 has been shown as amount financed in respect of the property under consideration and on the same date vide cheque No. 0192288 having paid Rs.49,99,650/- on account of the same property. The Assessee also invited our attention to the conveyance deed executed on 11.07.2013 (page No. 12 to 17 of the paper book) wherein value for the purpose of stamp duty of the property has been clearly shown as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
