9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (1) TMI 789X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cts Pvt. Ltd. (2010 (3) TMI 80 - SUPREME COURT ) is clearly attracted. The Commissioner Income Tax (Appeal) has specifically recorded that the variation in returned income and assessed income is disallowance of expenses not found allowable, no penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act is imposable and once such a finding has specifically been recorded, the penalty proceedings in the facts and circumstances of the case can not be sustained. - Decided in favour of assessee. - Income Tax Appeal No. - 3 of 2016 - - - Dated:- 18-1-2016 - Hon'ble Amreshwar Pratap Sahi And Hon'ble Attau Rahman Masoodi, JJ. For the Appellant : Manish Misra ORDER Heard Sri Manish Misra, learned counsel for the appellant. The departmen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been allowed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) reversing the order of penalty. The Revenue preferred an appeal against the same before the Tribunal and the Tribunal has affirmed the order of the Commissioner Income Tax. Both these authorities have held that there was no inaccurate disclosure or untrue explanation given by the assessee for any justification to impose penalty. We have considered the aforesaid submissions raised and from the aforesaid findings recorded, the first issue is about as to what is the alleged concealment or inaccurate particulars in respect to the return filed by the assessee. Learned counsel for the appellant has relied on a judgment in Mak Data Pvt. Ltd. (Supra) to contend that once the onu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... est that in order to be covered, there has to be concealment of the particulars of the income of the assessee. Secondly, the assessee must have furnished inaccurate particulars of his income. Present is not the case of concealment of the income. That is not the case of the Revenue either. However, the Learned Counsel for Revenue suggested that by making incorrect claim for the expenditure on interest, the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of the income. As per Law Lexicon, the meaning of the word particular is a detail or details (in plural sense); the details of a claim, or the separate items of an account. Therefore, the word particulars used in the Section 271(1)(c) would embrace the meaning of the details of the claim ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) 13 SCC 448 and reiterated in para 13 that:- 13. It goes without saying that for applicability of Section 271(1)(c), conditions stated therein must exist. Having considered the aforesaid ratio of the decision, what we find is that the Assessing Officer has treated non-furnishing of an explanation by the respondent assessee to be unjustified and the description given in return to be a concealment. We are unable to agree with the aforesaid finding recorded by the Assessing Officer which has been rightly reversed by the Commissioner Income Tax and affirmed by the Tribunal, inasmuch as, a wrong explanation cannot amount to furnishing of an incorrect particular. The non-furnishing of explanation falls within the same zone of considerat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
