9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 801X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oblivious of the fact that the companies are advised by experts and CAs who, more often than not, finalise reports. To expect assessees to scan each assessment with a fine comb, as is suggested by the revenue, and thereafter be told that the explanation about its reliance upon expert advice is not bona fide, in the facts of this case, at least do not appeal to this Court. Being a finding of fact based upon broad probabilities, the Court is of the opinion that no substantial question of law arises. - Decided against revenue - ITA 300/2016 - - - Dated:- 8-11-2016 - S. Ravindra Bhat And Najmi Waziri, JJ. For the Appellant For the Respondent : Sh. Raghvendra Singh and Sh. Rahul Chaudhary, Advocates ORDER 1. In this appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f mistake on the part of the Chartered Accountant [hereafter referred to as the CA ] in this case was specious. It is submitted that every company is under a duty to have its account audited and the fact that the CA s services were utilised and that he made some alleged mistake did not absolve the assessee from its primary duty cast in law to reveal the correct income. 3. The ITAT in the impugned order reasoned as follows: 6. A perusal of record shows that the sale of capital asset was shown in the Profit and Loss Account. The Assessing Officer also admitted that it has been shown in the Profit Loss Account. A glance on the above provision would suggest that for being covered under explanation-I to section 271(1)(c), there has to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion 271(1)(c) of the Act. The appeal of the assessee, is therefore, allowed. 4. The ITAT, we notice, took note of the Explanation 1(A) and 1(B) to Section 271(1)(c). Under Explanation 1(A), penalty would be attracted if an assessee fails to offer an explanation or offers a false explanation. Under Explanation 1(B), an unsubstantiated explanation or failure to prove that the explanation is bona fide attracts penalty. In this case, the narrow question is whether the explanation by the assessee that the non-reporting of income was on account of the belief held that the benefit accrued under Section 54G, on account of the advice of the CA was either a false explanation or no explanation at all [explanation 1(A)] or whether it was not bona ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
