9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 1419X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ese circumstances, the conclusion reached by the CWT(A) cannot be faulted.- Decided in favour of assessee - WTA No(s) 01/RJT/2016, 02/RJT/2016, 03/RJT/2016, 04/RJT/2016 - - - Dated:- 14-3-2017 - SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER And SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For The Assessee : Shri D.M. Rindani, AR For The Revenue : Shri Lalit P. Jain, Sr.DR ORDER PER BENCH : Revenue has filed three captioned appeals (in the case of Shri Mandhatasinhji M.Jadeja) against the combined order of the Commissioner of Wealth Tax (Appeals)-2, Rajkot [CWT(A) in short] dated 29/02/2016 for Assessment Years (AYs) 2008-09, 2009-10 2010-11. The Revenue has also filed another appeal as captioned above in the case of Smt.Kad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee had furnished inaccurate particulars of wealth and also concealed his wealth and proceeded to levy penalty of ₹ 49,700/-, ₹ 65,150/- and ₹ 6,57,900/- respectively. 5. Aggrieved by the penalty order, the assessee moved an appeal before the CWT(A). The CWT(A) on consideration of facts allowed the appeal of the assessee. The relevant findings of the CWT(A) reads as under:- 4.3. On merits of the issue as to whether this was a fit case for penalty u/s.18(1)(c) of the Act, I find that with the original return of wealth itself, the appellant filed detailed explanatory notes with regard to each type of asset. I also find from the table of dates comprised in the written submissions that the returns of wealth were f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 8. The Ld.AR, on the other hand, pointed out that the return was revised without any detection of mistake from the Department per se for inclusion of cashin hand. The cash in hand was also disclosed in the original return of wealth without including the same as taxable wealth after giving detailed explanatory note for not doing so. The assessee later changed its stand and filed the revised return for avoiding litigation on the issue. Therefore there is no concealment of any particulars of wealth per se in the original return of wealth or in the subsequent revised return. Therefore, the CWT(A) has rightly directed the AO to cancel the penalty. 9. We have perused the orders of the AO as well as CWT(A). On the background of facts ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
