9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (9) TMI 614 - AT - Income TaxPenalty u/s 271(1)(c) - assessee surrendered the income in revised return - proof of concealment or non-disclosure - Held that - Concealment of particulars of income or furnishing of inaccurate particular of income by the assessee has to be in the income tax return filed by it. The assessee can furnish the particulars of income in his return and everything would depend upon the income tax return filed by the assessee. This view gets supported by Explanation 4 as well as 5 and 5A of Section 271 of the Act. In the instant case the appellant has included the surrendered amount of ₹ 77,42,720/- in the revised return of income filed by it. There is no such concealment or nondisclosure as the assessee had made a complete disclosure in the income tax return and offered the surrendered amount for the purposes of tax. - Decided in favour of assessee
Issues Involved:
1. Imposition of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. 2. Validity of revised return filed by the assessee. 3. Assessment of concealment of income and furnishing of inaccurate particulars. Issue-wise Detailed Analysis: 1. Imposition of Penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act: The primary issue in this appeal was the action of the CIT(A) in deleting the penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. The Revenue argued that the penalty was rightly imposed as the revised return was filed only after incriminating documents were found during a survey, indicating concealment of income in the original return. The assessee contended that the revised return was filed within the prescribed period, and the surrendered amount was accepted without any further additions, thus negating any concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars. 2. Validity of Revised Return Filed by the Assessee: The tribunal noted that the revised return was filed within the prescribed period under Section 139(5) of the Act. The CIT(A) had acknowledged this fact, and the Revenue could not demonstrate that the revised return was belated. The revised return included the surrendered amount of ?77,42,720, and the assessment was completed under Section 143(3) without any further additions, indicating that the revised return was valid and timely. 3. Assessment of Concealment of Income and Furnishing of Inaccurate Particulars: The tribunal referred to multiple case laws to support the decision that no penalty under Section 271(1)(c) is imposable if the income declared in the revised return is accepted without any additions. The tribunal cited cases such as Muninaga Reddy Vs ACIT, R. Umedbhai Jewellers Pvt. Ltd Vs DCIT, Vasavi Shelters Vs ITO, and CIT Vs SAS Pharmaceuticals, which collectively held that if the assessee makes a complete disclosure in the revised return and the surrendered amount is accepted for tax purposes, there can be no concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars warranting penalty. The tribunal emphasized that the concealment or inaccurate particulars must be evident in the income tax return filed by the assessee. In this case, the assessee had included the surrendered amount in the revised return, making a complete disclosure, and thus, no penalty could be imposed. Conclusion: The tribunal found no infirmity in the order of the CIT(A) and upheld the deletion of the penalty. The appeal of the Revenue was dismissed, affirming that the revised return filed by the assessee, which included the surrendered amount, did not attract penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. Final Order: The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. (Order pronounced in the open court on 07/09/2018).
|
