9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 1173X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Act, the aforesaid concealment had no role to play and was totally irrelevant. Therefore, the concealment did not lead to tax evasion at all. Thus, there is no concealment of income or inaccurate furnishing of documents in the present case and case of CIT Vs. M/s Nalwa Sons Investment Ltd. squarely applicable to the present case [2010 (8) TMI 40 - DELHI HIGH COURT] - decided in favour of assessee - ITA No. 4514/DEL/2015 - - - Dated:- 18-9-2018 - SHRI N. K. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER For The Appellant : Sh. Kunal Godhwani, Karanb Batura, Advs. For The Respondent : Ms. Ashima Neb, Sr. DR ORDER PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JM This appeal is filed by the assessee against t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is case was completed u/s 147/143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 15/12/2006 wherein income of the assessee Company assessed at 63,66,915/- under normal provisions of Income Tax Act. The case was assessed at MAT since the tax payable as per the MAT is more than that of normal provisions. While completing the assessment, the Assessing Officer made certain additions, disallowances under the various heads and initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. Against the order of the Assessing Officer the assessee filed appeal with the CIT(A). The CIT (A) while orders dated 28/7/2009 dismiss the appeal of the assessee. However, on the issue of deduction u/s 80HHC, the relevant on account of scrap sell was allowed to the assessee consequ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the parties and perused the material available on record. It is pertinent to note that the assessment was completed vide order dated 15/12/2006 and the additions made therein was subsequently restricted to ₹ 1,30,963/- as regards disallowance u/s 80HHC by the CIT(A) vide order dated 28/7/2009.. The assessee has already paid tax as per the provisions of MAT u/s 115JB of ₹ 26,84,222/-. Thus, the assessee has simply made its claim regarding deduction u/s 80HHC which does not amount to furnish of inaccurate particulars in case of Nalva Sons Investment Ltd. The Hon ble Delhi High Court held as under:- 21. The question, however, in the present case, would be, as to whether furnishing of such wrong particulars had any the effect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessed under Section 115JB and not under the normal provisions. It is in this context that we have to see and examine the application of Explanation 4. 25. Judgment in the case of Gold Coins (supra), obviously, does not deal with such a situation. What is held by the Supreme Court in that case is that even if in the income tax return filed by the assessee losses are shown, penalty can still be imposed in a case where on setting off the concealed income against any loss incurred by the assessee under other head of income or brought forward from earlier years, the total income is reduced to a figure lower than the concealed income or even a minus figure. The court was of the opinion that 'the tax sought to be evaded' will mean t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
