9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 1155X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inclined to allow the assessee’s appeal both on ground of invalidity of the notice and also on merits. Therefore, the penalty levied by the AO is deleted.- Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No.908/Hyd/2017 - - - Dated:- 21-3-2018 - Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, Judicial Member And Shri S.Rifaur Rahman, Accountant Member For The Assessee : Shri Manoj Daga For The Revenue : Smt. Mini Chandran, DR ORDER Per Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, J.M. This is assessee s appeal for the A.Y 2008-09 against the order of the CIT (A)-5, Hyderabad, dated 20.03.2017 confirming the penalty levied by the AO u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: Ground No.l: The Ld CIT(A) erred both ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Mere mention that the penalty is levied U/s 271(1)(c) cannot substitute the requirement of specific finding of concealment of particulars of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. Ground No.5: On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the fact that the appellant has disclosed all the facts relating to residential property and there is no concealment or misrepresentation of any of the material facts on this issue. Under the circumstance the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have considered that mere disallowance of a legal claim cannot be a ground for levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act as held by the Courts . 2. Brief facts of the case are that the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ter, the AO initiated penalty proceedings by issuing a notice u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act dated 29.12.2011. Meanwhile, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT (A), against the addition made by the AO, and the CIT (A) confirmed the order of the AO by observing that the assessee has offered rental income from eight properties and therefore, the assessee is not eligible for exemption u/s 54F of the Act because he is the owner of more than two residential properties. The assessee accepted the order of the CIT (A). 4. Thereafter, the AO completed the penalty proceedings by passing the order dated 12.11.2015, for the claim of the exemption u/s 54F of the Act. The AO imposed minimum penalty of ₹ 6,54,058 u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. Aggriev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n. He also placed reliance upon the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Pr. CIT-I, Visakhapatnam vs. Smt. Baisetty Revathi reported in (2017) 398 ITR 0088 and various other decisions of the ITAT, wherein the above decisions have been followed and the penalty has been deleted. 6. The learned DR, on the other hand, supported the orders of the authorities below. 7. Having regard to the rival contentions and the material on record, we find that the AO had disallowed the claim u/s 54F of the Act on the ground that the assessee has not filed details of the investments made in the residential property for which the exemption has been claimed. We find that in the return of income filed in response to the notice u/s 153A o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng penalty about the nature of the default committed by the assessee and the assessee should be made aware of the default committed by him for which the penalty is initiated so that the assessee can answer or submit its explanation as to why the penalty should not be levied. At the time of issuance of notice u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act, the AO had rejected the claim u/s 54F of the Act only on the ground that the assessee has not furnished the details of the investment made by the assessee. Therefore, the assessee can only understand that the penalty is initiated for non-furnishing of the information on investment made, unless the AO clarifies that the penalty is initiated for making a wrong or fictitious claim or for making an ineligible claim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... w 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 made. It is an admitted position in the present case that no information given in the Return was found to be incorrect or inaccurate. It is not as if any statement made or any detail supplied was found to be factually incorrect. Hence, at least, prima facie, the assessee cannot be held guilty of furnishing inaccurate particulars. The Learned Counsel argued that submitting an incorrect claim in law for the expenditure on interest would amount to giving inaccurate particu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
