9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
The appeal under s. 260A of the IT Act against the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal regarding the imposition of penalty under s. 271(1)(c) of the IT Act for the assessment year 2004-05. Summary: The assessee filed a return declaring an income of Rs. 16,720, claiming profit on the sale of shares exempt under s. 10(36) of the IT Act. The Assessing Officer (AO) disallowed the claim, leading to penalty proceedings under s. 271(1)(c) of the IT Act. The CIT(A) partially allowed the appeal, reducing the penalty. The Revenue appealed to the Tribunal, which upheld the CIT(A)'s decision. The Revenue further appealed to the High Court. Upon review, it was found that the assessee acted on the advice of his counsel in claiming the deduction under s. 10(36) of the IT Act. The counsel admitted to advising the assessee on the deduction. The High Court cited precedent stating that a litigant should not suffer for the mistake of their counsel. The assessee had provided all details related to the capital gains, indicating no intention to conceal income. While the claim was incorrect, it was made in good faith based on legal advice. The High Court concluded that the Tribunal's decision was correct, as there was no error in the order. It was held that no question of law arose for determination, and the appeal was dismissed.
|
