9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Appeal against penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act for Assessment Year 2003-04 based on additions to total income - Loss on sale of car and loss on sale of shares.
Loss on sale of car: Assessee accepted the addition during assessment proceedings as an inadvertent error, claiming it should be treated as speculation loss u/s. 73 - Assessing Officer disallowed the claim and imposed penalty - Assessee argued for no penalty citing inadvertent mistake and case laws in support. Loss on sale of shares: Assessee claimed the loss was also inadvertent and should be treated as speculation loss u/s. 73 - Assessee appealed against penalty imposition - Ld. CIT(A) confirmed penalty, stating the losses were capital losses and penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) was justified for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. Appellant's arguments: Assessee contended no concealment or deliberate inaccuracy in furnishing income particulars - Relied on case laws including Hindustan Steel Ltd. and Vinod Kapoor - Asserted bonafide claims not inviting penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) - Submitted explanations and relied on relevant case laws. Department's stance: Departmental Representative argued that assessee accepted mistakes only when confronted by Assessing Officer - Loss on sale of car and shares were capital losses, not speculation losses - Assessee furnished inaccurate particulars of income. Judgment: Tribunal dismissed the appeal, noting that although assessee corrected the wrong claims during assessment proceedings, it was not a voluntary act - Rejected arguments based on prior case laws and upheld penalty imposition u/s. 271(1)(c) due to clearly non-allowable losses claimed by the assessee.
|
