9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (4) TMI 1341X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0/- on account of trading in computer software while it incurred a trading loss of ₹ 3,97,38,050/- on account of trading in shares. According to Explanation appended to Section 73 of the Income-tax Act, the loss in trading in shares is to be deemed as speculation loss. In the quantum proceedings, the assessee s claim of business loss and trading in shares were disallowed and the same was treated as speculation loss and in respect of such disallowance, penalty proceedings were initiated u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. The claim of the assessee is that the assessee never concealed any income nor has furnished any inaccurate particulars of income and disallowance has been made only because of the deeming provisions of explanation to section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ished all the relevant materials. The AO treated the said loss under Explanation to section 73 as deemed speculation loss and levied penalty u/s 271(1)(c). The Commissioner (Appeals) cancelled the said penalty holding that the assessee had disclosed all the material facts and it was only under deeming provisions that the loss was to be treated as speculative loss. The Commissioner (Appeals) had cancelled the penalty after considering the facts on merit of the case. He had not cancelled the penalty on the ground of wilful concealment or on the ground of mens rea . Thus, it was opined that the instant case was a simple case of fighting in between duty rights which automatically did not amount to a case of concealing particulars or furnis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot furnished any inaccurate particulars in respect of the issue in dispute. From out of the details furnished only, the AO has went on to consider the trading loss as a speculation loss in terms of provisions of Explanation to Sec.73 of the Act. On the part of the assessee he has disclosed all the material details which could enable the department to come to a proper conclusion. The learned CIT(A), in deleting the penalty, has followed the decision of Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Auric Invstment Securities Ltd. 310 ITR 121 (Del), inasmuch as the assessee has disclosed all particulars of income and has not concealed any particulars thereof. In the light of the details that it had furnished, it cannot be said that the assessee ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
