9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (6) TMI 1032X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... evasion of tax which is sine qua non for imposition of penalty. The explanation offered by the assessee seems to be bonafide - Decided in favour of assessee. - I.T.A. No. 3529/Ahd/2015 - - - Dated:- 11-6-2018 - Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member And Ms. Madhumita Roy, Judicial Member Appellant by : Mr. Tej Shah, AR Respondent by : Ms. Sonia Kumar, Sr.DR ORDER Per Ms. Madhumita Roy, JM Being aggrieved by and/or dissatisfied with the order dated 20.10.2015 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals), Ahmedabad-5 [Ld.CIT(A) in short] arising out of the order passed by the ITO Ward-14(1) Ahmedabad dated 20.03.2014 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2009-10 under section 271(1)(c) of the Act, the instant appeal has been filed before us by the assessee with the following ground:- 1. That the Ld.CIT(A) erred in confirming the order of the AO in levying penalty of ₹ 3,20,300/- u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act. 2. The sole issue relates to the penalty of ₹ 1,45,000/- on account of unexplained investment made by the assessee. 3. The brief facts of the case is that the assessee has purchased a property of an amount of ₹ 56,26,300/- on 07.10.20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ut the CIT(A) upheld the order passed by the authorities below confirming the penalty which is impugned before us. 7. On the other hand, against the original assessment order dated 26.12.2011 an appeal has been preferred before the CIT(A) by the Assessee but without any success. Thereafter, further appeal has been preferred by the assessee before this Ld.Tribunal against the order dated 11.09.2012 passed by the CIT(A)-XXI, Ahmedabad. The said matter was disposed of by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal allowing the appeal of the assessee upon setting aside the orders passed by the authorities below. The Ld.Tribunal was pleased to restore the issues to the file of the AO for readjudication. 7.1. In compliance of the said order passed by this Ld.Tribunal a further assessment order dated 01.12.2017 was passed by the ITO Ward- 5(1)(1), Ahmedabad. 8. At the time of hearing of the matter, the Ld.Representative of the assessee strongly urged that the penalty proceeding cannot be initiated on the basis of the addition of ₹ 1,45,000/- since there is no concealment on the part of the assessee. The Ld.AR relied upon the judgement of Hon ble Apex Court in the case of Dilip N ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ; to cover or keep from sight; to prevent the discovery of; to withhold knowledge of. The offence of concealment is, thus, a direct attempt to hide an item of income or a portion thereof from the knowledge of the income tax authorities. In Webster's Dictionary, inaccurate has been defined as: not accurate, not exact or correct; not according to truth; erroneous; as an inaccurate statement, copy or transcript. 44. It signifies a deliberate act or omission on the part of the assessee. Such deliberate act must be either for the purpose of concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars. 45. The term 'inaccurate particulars' is not defined. Furnishing of an assessment of value of the property may not by itself be furnishing of inaccurate particulars. Even if the explanations are taken recourse to, a finding has to be arrived at having regard to clause (a) of Explanation 1 that the Assessing Officer is required to arrive at a finding that the explanation offered by an assessee, in the event he offers one, was false. He must be found to have failed to prove that such explanation is not only not bona fide but all the facts relating to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... thus, burden lies on the department to establish that the assessee had concealed his income. Since burden of proof in penalty proceedings varies from that in the assessment proceeding, a finding in an assessment proceeding that a particular receipt is income cannot automatically be adopted, though a finding in the assessment proceeding constitute good evidence in the penalty proceeding. In the penalty proceedings, thus, the authorities must consider the matter afresh as the question has to be considered from a different angle. [See Anantharam Veerasinghaiah Co. v. C.I.T., Andhra Pradesh, 1980 Supp SCC 13]. 67. 'Concealment of income' and 'furnishing of inaccurate particulars' are different. Both concealment and furnishing inaccurate particulars refer to deliberate act on the part of the assessee. A mere omission or negligence would not constitute a deliberate act of suppressio veri or suggestio falsi. Although it may not be very accurate or apt but suppressio veri would amount to concealment, suggestio falsi would amount to furnishing of inaccurate particulars. 12. It appears from the records that the assessee furnished the bank statement and partic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
