2017 (3) TMI 1419 - AT - Wealth-tax

Penalty imposed under s.18(1)(c) of Wealth Tax Act - concealment of any particulars of wealth per se - CWT(A) directed the AO to cancel the penalty - Held that - No infirmity in the reasoning of the CWT(A). The CWT(A), in our view, has appreciated the facts in perspective. It is not a case where any wealth was kept hidden from the knowledge of the Department. It is merely a case where the assessee has initially agitated the taxability of cash in hand after making a proper disclosure of the facts thereon and later shifted his stand on the same voluntarily prior to any discussion on the point. Under these circumstances, the conclusion reached by the CWT(A) cannot be faulted.- Decided in favour of assessee

Issues involved:
1. Appeals filed by Revenue against the order of the Commissioner of Wealth Tax (Appeals) for Assessment Years 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11.
2. Challenge to penalty imposed under section 18(1)(c) of Wealth Tax Act in the appeals.
3. Assessment of net wealth, filing of returns, and penalty imposition based on revised returns.
4. Consideration of facts and voluntariness in filing returns leading to penalty deletion by Commissioner of Wealth Tax (Appeals).
5. Arguments by Revenue and Assessee regarding penalty imposition.
6. Review of orders by the Appellate Tribunal and dismissal of Revenue's appeals.

Detailed Analysis:

1. The Revenue filed appeals against the Commissioner of Wealth Tax (Appeals) order for Assessment Years 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11, challenging the relief granted to the Assessee towards penalty under section 18(1)(c) of the Wealth Tax Act.

2. The Assessee initially filed returns of wealth for the respective years, later revised them upon notice under section 17(1), leading to penalty imposition by the Assessing Officer for furnishing inaccurate particulars of wealth and alleged concealment.

3. The Commissioner of Wealth Tax (Appeals) allowed the Assessee's appeal, noting the voluntary nature of filing returns, detailed explanatory notes provided, and lack of false explanations, leading to the deletion of penalties for all three years.

4. The Appellate Tribunal reviewed the orders and found no fault in the Commissioner's reasoning, emphasizing that the Assessee did not hide wealth but changed stance on taxability of cash in hand before any discussion, resulting in the dismissal of Revenue's appeals.

5. In a similar case for Assessment Year 2009-10 involving another Assessee, the Appellate Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal based on identical facts and issues as the previous appeals, maintaining consistency in decisions.

6. Ultimately, all four appeals by the Revenue in the cases of both Assessees were dismissed by the Appellate Tribunal, upholding the Commissioner of Wealth Tax (Appeals) decisions regarding penalty deletion.

This detailed analysis covers the issues, facts, legal interpretations, and outcomes of the judgments delivered by the Commissioner of Wealth Tax (Appeals) and the Appellate Tribunal, ensuring a comprehensive understanding of the legal proceedings and decisions made in the case.

← Previous Next →