9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (5) TMI 36X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... med the investment made in the name of minor children. As pointed out by the Ld. Counsel, assessee did not prefer an appeal due to smallness of the tax involved. That does not mean that there is concealment of income, more so, by way of furnishing of inaccurate particulars so as to attract penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. Mere disallowance in assessment or addition by invoking the deeming provisions does not automatically attract the provisions of Section 271(1)(c), unless the conditions thereon are satisfied. The facts of the case does not fall either under the head ‘concealment of income’ or under the head ‘furnishing of inaccurate particulars’. All the necessary details were furnished by assessee and there is no furnishing of inaccurat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... see did not prefer any appeal but Revenue preferred an appeal on the deletion of ₹ 30,25,000/-. The order of the CIT(A) was confirmed by the ITAT. Since the quantum addition at ₹ 4 Lakhs has reached finality, AO completed the proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) and levied penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. Assessee contested before the Ld. CIT(A) that there were no inaccurate particulars of income and mere addition in the assessment does not warrant any penalty u/s. 271(1)(c). 2.1. On merits, it was submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) in his wisdom confirmed the share application money in the hands of the minor children of the Directors when the investment made by the Directors itself was accepted. It wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed only ₹ 4 Lakhs on the reason that the minor children are not assessees, whereas the Directors were assessed tax and the funds have been transferred through banking channels. It was submitted that those minor children are not assessees as their incomes are being assessed in the hands of their parents as per the provisions of the IT Act and the funds are through banking channels only and referred to the order of the CIT(A) and submissions made therein. It was submitted that mere confirmation of addition which was not contested due to smallness of the tax does not result in levy of penalty u/s. 271(1)(c). 3.1. It was further submitted that those minor share applicants have their own sources and therefore, it cannot be considered th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on by invoking the deeming provisions does not automatically attract the provisions of Section 271(1)(c), unless the conditions thereon are satisfied. The facts of the case does not fall either under the head concealment of income or under the head furnishing of inaccurate particulars . All the necessary details were furnished by assessee and there is no furnishing of inaccurate particulars in this case. 5.1. The facts are fully in tune with the facts as considered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Petro products P. Ltd., [322 ITR 158] (SC). Following the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the above said case, we are of the opinion that mere addition of the share capital from the mi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
