9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 1019X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rued from money advanced to BMB Promoters, it is apparent from record that the assessee has not received/realized the interest income and since the assessee being HUF, it has the legitimate right to maintain its books of accounts in cash system of accounting as per Section 145(1) of the Act, therefore the interest income can be taxed in the hands of the assessee only in the year in which it receives the interest. Therefore we hereby direct the AO to delete the interest income estimated in the hands of the assessee towards interest accrued from deposits in RD account towards interest accrued from money advanced to BMB Promoters since the assessee has not received the same during the relevant assessment years. Estimation of busniss in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y with the provisions of the Act within the stipulated period of time. Therefore taking a lenient view and drawing strength from the provisions of Section 273B of the Act, we hereby direct the Ld.AO to delete the penalty levied for ₹ 5000/- by invoking the provisions of Section 271F of the Act. - I.T.A. Nos. 217 to 220/Chny/2015 - - - Dated:- 3-4-2019 - Shri A. Mohan Alankamony, Accountant Member And Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Judicial Member For the Appellant : Dr.M.Srinivasa Rao, CIT For the Respondent : Shri K.Ravi, Advocate ORDER PER A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, AM:- These appeals by the assessee are directed against the common order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-19, Chennai, dated 28 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... imated the business income of the assessee at ₹ 3,00,000/- as against ₹ 2,74,320/- admitted by the assessee in the return of income filed. 2.4 For the assessment year 2007-08 in ITA No.220/Chny/2015 with respect to the penalty appeal, the assessee has filed the following ground:- The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in upholding the order of the Ld.AO who had levied penalty of ₹ 5,000/- invoking the provision of Section 271F of the Act. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an HUF claimed to have filed its return of income for the assessment years 2005-06, 2006-07 2007-08 admitting total income of ₹ 4,60,000/-, ₹ 4,49,910/- ₹ 2,74,320/- on 12.10.2006, 18.03.2008 02.06.2009 respectiv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the Tribunal in the assessee s case in IT(SS)A No.11/Chny/2014 for the block assessment period 01.04.1996 to 27.03.2003 vide order dated 02.04.2019 had deleted the addition of ₹ 11,45,000/- towards promissory notes, there is no scope for estimating the interest income on such advance for all the relevant assessment years. Further with respect to the other additions of ₹ 27,281/- towards interest accrued from deposits in RD account, ₹ 36,000/- towards interest accrued from money advanced to BMB Promoters, it is apparent from record that the assessee has not received/realized the interest income and since the assessee being HUF, it has the legitimate right to maintain its books of accounts in cash system of accounting as p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed in the return filed by him and thereafter arrive at the apt conclusion based on merits rather than assessing the income by mere estimation. Since the Ld.AO has failed to do so, we are of the considered view that estimating the business income of the assessee at ₹ 3,00,000/- is not correct. Therefore we hereby direct the Ld.AO to assess the income as stated in the return of income belatedly filed by the assessee. It is ordered accordingly. 6. Ground No.2.3: Levy of Penalty U/s.271F of the Act for the assessment year 2007-08:- Since the assessee did not file his return of income for the assessment year 2007-08 in spite of notice issued U/s.142(1) of the Act on 19.09.2008, the Ld.AO invoking his discretionary powers under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
