Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2024 (7) TMI 898

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nly on estimated basis. In such a scenario, the penalty is not sustainable in law considering the ratio of Hon ble High Court of Madras in the cited case law of CIT vs. P Rojes [ 2013 (3) TMI 264 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] Mere making of an incorrect claim in law cannot tantamount to furnishing of inaccurate particulars. See Reliance Petroproducts (P) Ltd [ 2010 (3) TMI 80 - SUPREME COURT] . Thus, respectfully following the same, we delete the impugned penalty on merits, in all the three years. Legality of penalty notice in absence of specific charge in show-cause notice - As we are not impressed with all these grounds considering the facts that several notices were issued to the assessee after framing of assessment order as well as after first a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ugned penalty would be bad-in-law. On merits, Ld. AR submitted that finally the additions have been sustained on estimated basis only and therefore, the same do not call for levy of penalty in terms of various judicial decisions. The copies of the same have been placed on record. The Ld. Sr. DR vehemently opposed the legal grounds and pleaded for confirmation of impugned penalty by drawing our attention to the order of Tribunal in quantum addition. It has been submitted that the assessee has already been granted excessive relief on quantum additions and therefore, the penalties have to be sustained. Having heard rival submissions and upon perusal of case records, our adjudication would be as under. Proceedings before lower authorities 3.1 T .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... settle the demand under DTVsVs Scheme, 2020. However, the assessee failed to pay demand as per Form-3 and the settlement could not be made. Considering the same, the appeal of the assessee was adjudicated on merits by Tribunal vide ITA Nos. 2550 to 2552/Chny/2018 order dated 12.05.2023. in para 7.1 of the order, the Tribunal accepted Net Profit Rate of 18.40% which was highest amongst the three years and directed Ld. AO to re-compute the income of the assessee by adopting profit rate of 18.40%. 3.4 The order giving effect to the Tribunal order has been passed by Ld. AO on 20.12.2023. Upon perusal of the same, it could be seen that the income of the assessee has ultimately been revised to Rs. 39.67 Lacs as against Rs. 49.80 Lacs as determin .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... te particulars of income. However, suitable directions were given to Ld. AO to reduce the penalty in terms of quantum order of Tribunal. Aggrieved as aforesaid, the assessee is in further appeal before us. Our findings and Adjudication 4. The material facts are not in dispute. The assessee is engaged in the business of real estate. Consequent to survey findings, the case was reopened and assessments were framed for all the three years in identical fashion. Pertinently, the assessee has not maintained any books of accounts. It could also be seen that finally the Tribunal has estimated income of the assessee and directed Ld. AO to adopt Net profit Rate of 18.40% which is nothing but highest profit rate of three years. In other words, the addi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... must have furnished inaccurate particulars of his income. It was further pointed out by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that in order to expose the assessee to the penalty, unless the case is strictly covered by the provision, the penalty provision cannot be invoked. Mere making of an incorrect claim in law cannot tantamount to furnishing of inaccurate particulars. 6. In our considered opinion, the ratio of aforesaid decision applies to the facts of present appeals before us. Therefore, respectfully following the same, we delete the impugned penalty on merits, in all the three years. 7. The Ld. AR has filed additional grounds of appeal which are legal grounds. It has been urged that show-cause notices issued to the assessee do not specify ex .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates