9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved:
The issue involved in this case is whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in deleting penalties imposed under section 271(1)(c) for non-inclusion of interest free advances received by the assessee from a company in which she had substantial interest, as deemed dividend in her income. Judgment Details: The assessing officer imposed penalty assuming deliberate income concealment by the assessee, but the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) found that the appellant was ignorant of the law and had no intention to conceal income, leading to deletion of the penalty. The Tribunal affirmed this decision, citing the principle that ignorance of law can be a valid defense. The Tribunal referenced judgments by the Apex Court and Bombay High Court emphasizing that penalty cannot be imposed solely due to ignorance of the law. It was noted that mere omission from the return does not constitute concealment unless there is evidence of intention to hide income. The Tribunal found no evidence that the assessee failed to disclose the advance payments with any intention to conceal income or provide inaccurate particulars. The Court, under Section 260(A), concluded that no question of law was involved as the Tribunal had correctly decided all legal and factual aspects. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed, and parties were instructed to act on a signed copy of the order.
|
