9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (10) TMI 545X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... concerned, the amount was deleted by the Tribunal and, therefore, the question of imposing any penalty on this amount no longer survives - With regard to penalty on the amount of ₹ 35,03,011/-, the AO had added this amount as unexplained investment since the assessee could not produce any books of account - The penalty notice was with regard to furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income, which relates to furnishing of incorrect address - The penalty notice was not issued with regard to concealment of income - since the penalty notice was only confined to the furnishing of inaccurate particulars and was not with regard to concealment of income, the imposition of penalty for the unexplained deposit in Bank amounting to ₹ 35,0 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n given in assessment order while recording satisfaction and while issuing show cause notice, whereas the A.O. had levied penalty on the same reason given in assessment order while recording satisfaction and while issuing show cause notice. The facts leading to the filing of appeal is, that the assessee is a company deriving its income from cold storage for the assessment year 2003-04. The assessee filed his return along with the audited copy of balance sheet and profit and loss account. The assessee was given a notice under Section 142(1) of the Act requiring to file relevant information and evidence such as books of accounts. Since the assessee did not comply with the terms of notice, the Assessing Officer proceeded under Section 144A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... count books were produced to examine the nature and source of these drafts nor the Ld. Addl. Commissioner of Income-tax Range-3, Etah issued the directions under section 144A on this issue, therefore, the amount of drafts amounting to ₹ 35,03,011/- is added in the total income under section 69 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. While making the assessment, the Assessing Officer found that the assessee has concealed the particulars of income and filed inaccurate particulars of income, therefore, held that proceedings under Section 27(1)(c) of the Act would be issued separately. The assessee, being aggrieved, filed an appeal and thereafter filed a second appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal by an order dated 25.05.2007 deleted the add ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inaccurate particulars of his income in the return of income filed for the Assessment Year 2003-04. The assessee, being aggrieved, filed an appeal, which was partly allowed. The appellate authority held that since the Tribunal had deleted the addition of ₹ 26,33,328/-, the question of imposing penalty of this amount does not survive. The appellate authority, however, affirmed the imposition of penalty in respect of addition of ₹ 35,03,011/-. The appellate authority directed the Assessing Officer to work out 100% of tax thereon, which would be the amount of penalty. The assessee, being aggrieved, filed a second appeal before the Tribunal, which was allowed and the penalty was set aside. The department, being aggrieved, file ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... act or correct; not according to truth; erroneous; as an inaccurate statement, copy or transcript . It signifies a deliberate act or omission on the part of the assessee. Such deliberate act must be either for the purpose of concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars. In view of the penalty notice, the inaccurate details was with regard to non-furnishing of the correct address of the farmers,which was in relation to the advance taken from the farmers to the tune of ₹ 26,33,328/-. No inaccurate details was furnished by the assessee with regard to the addition of amount of ₹ 35,03,011/- as is clear from paragraph 21 of the assessment order, which has already been extracted aforesaid. Insofar as inaccurate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... laimed the expenditure, which claim was not accepted or was not acceptable to the Revenue, that by itself would not attract the penalty under Section 271(1) (c). If the contention of the Revenue is accepted then in each case of every Return where claim made is not accepted by the Assessing Officer for any reason, the assessee will invite penalty under Section 271(1) (c). This is not the intendment of the legislature. The assessment order clearly indicates that the audited copy of the balance sheet and profit and loss account were filed, which were not accepted by the Assessing Officer and best judgment was passed. In the entirety of the circumstances, we find that since the penalty notice was only confined to the furnishing of inaccur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
