9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Assessment of rental income, Penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act.
Assessment of rental income: The appeal was against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (A) for the assessment year 1999-2000. The AO assessed the rental income received by the assessee as income from house property instead of business income. The assessee argued that the income was derived from business assets and should be classified as business income. The AO initiated penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. Penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act: The AO imposed a penalty on the assessee for concealing income. However, the Commissioner of Income Tax (A) held that the penalty was unjustified as there was no conscious effort to conceal income. The Revenue challenged the deletion of penalty before the Appellate Tribunal. Judgment Details: - The Tribunal noted that the assessee had shown rental income as business income, which the AO assessed as income from house property. The Tribunal referred to previous cases and held that a mere rejection of a legal claim for taxability of income under a specific head is not sufficient to warrant a penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. - Citing relevant case law, the Tribunal emphasized that unless the details supplied in the return are found to be inaccurate or false, the penalty cannot be levied. Making a wrong claim that is not sustainable in law does not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars. The Tribunal upheld the deletion of the penalty imposed by the AO. - Relying on recent decisions, the Tribunal concluded that the penalty was not justified in this case. The appeal by the Revenue was dismissed, and the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (A) deleting the penalty was upheld. Conclusion: The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, upholding the deletion of the penalty imposed by the AO for the assessment year 1999-2000.
|
