9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (2) TMI 1245X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cannot amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars. In the present case, the assessee filed all the details and he made claim i.e. the amount received by him is an advance. According to the assessing officer the amount received by the assessee is a deemed dividend by virtue of deemed provisions of law i.e. 2(22)(e) of the Act. Thus, we find that the assessee neither concealed the income nor filed inaccurate particulars. The above judgement of the Hon ble Supreme Court squarely applies to the facts of the case - I.T.A. No. 243/Vizag/2013 - - - Dated:- 19-2-2016 - SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For The Appellant : Smt. D. Komali Krishna, DR For Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /- in the hands of the assessee, as he held 45% shares in the firm. On appeal CIT(A) confirmed the order of the A.O. On further appeal, the ITAT has confirmed the order of the authorities below. Thereafter, the A.O. has initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. It is submitted before the A.O. that penalty was imposed based on the basis of information and other particulars furnished by the assessee and therefore the assessee neither concealed the income nor filed inaccurate particulars and submitted that proceedings may be dropped. 3. However, the assessing officer after considering the explanations of the assessee rejected the explanation given by the assessee and observed that the assessee has concealed the in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /s. Pratyusha Associates and he is also Director in M/s. Pratyusha Shipping Private Ltd. In the assessment order, the A.O. has observed that M/s. Pratyusha Shipping Pvt. Ltd. has shown accumulated reserves and surplus of ₹ 145.53 lakhs as on 31.3.2001 and has also advanced loan of ₹ 111.77 lakhs to form M/s. Pratyusha Associates on 31.3.2001 where assessee is having substantial interest of 45% in the firm. Accordingly, A.O. has come to a conclusion that the amount received by M/s. Pratyusha Associates, to extent of the assessee s interest 45% amounting to ₹ 46,16,144/- as a deemed dividend by invoking the provisions of section 2(22)(e) of the Act. The assessee has submitted before the A.O. that it is only an advance receiv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r false, there is no question of invoking penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. Mere making a claim, which is not sustainable in law, by itself will not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars regarding the income of the assessee. Such as claim made in the return cannot amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars . 8. In the present case, the assessee filed all the details and he made claim i.e. the amount received by him is an advance. According to the assessing officer the amount received by the assessee is a deemed dividend by virtue of deemed provisions of law i.e. 2(22)(e) of the Act. Thus, we find that the assessee neither concealed the income nor filed inaccurate particulars. The above judgement of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
