9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 1671X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d and consideration relating to which had been received by the assessee. With respect to the balance land, the High Court held that no transfer of the same had taken place even by virtue of the JDA and hence the assessee was not exigible to capital gain tax on the same. In view of the above, since the addition made to the income of the assessee does not survive, the question of levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) does not arise at all. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No. 27/Chd/2015 - - - Dated:- 8-12-2015 - H. L. Karwa (Vice President) And Annapurna Mehrotra (Accountant Member) For the Appellant : Manjit Singh For the Respondent : Tej Mohan Singh ORDER Annapurna Mehrotra (Accountant Member) This appeal has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al gains by adopting this amount as sale consideration. Finally, the assessment was made by taking capital gains at ₹ 1,77,74,258/- and after considering the capital gain disclosed by the assessee on the impugned property amounting to ₹ 11,11,785/- an addition of ₹ 1,66,62,473/- was made to the income of the assessee. The Assessing Officer initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act and after affording an opportunity of being heard to the assessee, the Assessing Officer levied a penalty of ₹ 35,87,962/-. 3. On appeal, Ld. CIT(A), cancelled the penalty by observing as under : 5.1 Thus, the penalty for concealment can be levied when the assessee has concealed particulars of his income or has furnishe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e construction of the building, in which the appellant was to get a flat as a part of sale consideration, has not started till date. In these peculiar circumstances, the belief of the appellant that the capital gains, on which he has to pay tax, has to be computed only on the basis of the amount which he has actually received, cannot be considered to be totally unreasonable, though it is not strictly legal. The fact that all the material facts which were required to compute the correct capital gain were furnished by the appellant in his return, establish his bonafide credentials. In view of this discussion, it is held that penalty for concealment has been wrongly levied in the instant case and the same is accordingly cancelled. Grounds of a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... illon in ITA NO. 1140/Chd/2014, and Sh. Tej Prakash Singh in ITA No. 491/Chd/2015 wherein the Tribunal decided a similar issue in favour of the assessee, and confirmed the order of Ld. CIT(A) in canceling the penalty levied u/s 271(1) (c) of the Act. 6. We have heard the contentions of both the parties and perused the documents placed before us. 7. On perusal of the order of the Hon ble Punjab Haryana High Court in the case of the assessee bunched alongwith the case of C.S Atwal(supra), we find that the High Court has decided the quantum issue in favour of the assessee by holding that the assessee was liable to pay tax on capital gain earned on only that portion of the land which had been duly transferred by way of Registered sale deed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d from the developer, capital gains tax has already been paid on that and sale deeds have also been executed. In view of cancellation of JDA dated 25.2.2007, no further amount has been received and no action thereon has been taken. It was urged that as and when any amount is received, capital gains tax shall be discharged thereon in accordance ITA No.200 of 2013 (O M) 76 with law. In view of the aforesaid stand, while disposing of the appeals, we observe that the assessee appellants shall remain bound by their said stand. 6. The issue of exigibility to capital gains tax having been decided in favour of the assessee, the question of exemption under Section 54F of the Act would not survive any longer and has been rendered academic. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
