9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (8) TMI 224X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r additions. Therefore when the assessee himself has offered the above two incomes in the revised return, we are unable to appreciate in what way the assessee is aggrieved by the orders of the lower authorities. Further on perusal of the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee we notice that no specific contention is raised on the grievance caused by the orders of the lower authorities. Accordingly we dismiss the various grounds raised by the assessee as not tenable. Assessee raised additional ground stating that only 50% of the rental income is assessable in his hands since the House Property is jointly owned by him along with his wife. The assessee also submitted additional evidences in this regard. However during the course of hearing the ld AR did not press for admission of the additional ground and the evidences submitted. Accordingly the additional ground and additional evidences are not admitted for adjudication - Appeal dismissed. Penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) - The assessee is a Singapore citizen and is assessed to tax there. The assessee claims that assessment year in Singapore is different (calendar year) and therefore there is a time lag in getting the correct details o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 142(1) on 11.10.2017. Based on the query raised by the AO that the assessee has not declared Rs. 6,21,652/- under the head Income from Other Sources and 100% of the rental income from House Property in Singapore amounting to Rs. 23,71,076/-, the assessee filed a revised return of income on 30.07.2017 in which the above said incomes were included. The AO completed the assessment by making the addition as per the income declared by the assessee in the revised return of income. The relevant observations of the AO are extracted below: 3. On verification of the ITS details it was observed that the assessee has not offered Rs. 6,21,662/- under the head income from other sources and Rs. 23,71,076/- under the head House property. During the assessment proceedings, the assessee has submitted revised return of income filed on 30.03.2017, wherein he has offered the above amount for taxation. Accordingly an amount of Rs. 6,21,662/- Rs. 23,71,076/- is being added under the head income from other sources and house property respectively. Penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(C) is being initiated separately for consultant furnishing inaccurate particular of income. 4. The details filed during the co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee, who is residing in Singapore, has become a resident and ordinarily resident during AY 2014-15 and AY 2015-16 and thereby offered his global income to tax in India. During the course of assessment proceedings the AO the AO held that Rs. 6,21,652/- under the head Income from Other Sources and Rs. 23,71,076/- being the differential 50% of rental income has to be offered to tax. The assessee filed the revised return of income including the above incomes declared an income of Rs. 12,28,70,870/-. The AO assessed the income as per the revised return of income. From the perusal of the above facts we notice that the assessee himself has offered the interest income as per Form 26AS and the differential rental income in the revised return. We notice that the AO has accepted the additional income offered as per the revised return while completing the assessment under section 143(3) and the CIT(A) upheld the order of AO. In other words, the lower authorities have accepted the income as offered by the assessee in the revised return of income without making any other additions. Therefore when the assessee himself has offered the above two incomes in the revised return, we are unable to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... utiny assessment by issuing notice under section 143(2) of the Act on 22.08.2016. After receipt of notice under section 143(2) of the Act and during the course of assessment proceedings, the appellant revised his Return of Income on 30.03.2017, offering to tax Income from Other Sources of Rs. 6,21,662/- and Income from House Property of Rs. 23,71,076/-. 8.1. Assessment under section 143(3) of the Act was completed on 08.12.2017, assessing the total income at Rs. 12,28,70,870/- by making the above additions to the total income, declared by the appellant in the original return of income. While completing the assessment under section 143(3) of the Act, penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act were separately initiated for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income leading to concealment. Penalty order under section 271(1)(c) of the Act was passed on 28.06.2018. levying minimum penalty of Rs. 9,24,760/-, being 100% of the tax sought to be evaded on Rs. 29,92,738/- (Income from Other Sources of Rs. 6,21,662/- and Income from House Property of Rs. 23,71,076/-). 8.2. From the facts circumstances of the case, it is observed that the Income from Other Sources of Rs. 6,21,662/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n of income during the course of assessment proceedings. Therefore the ld AR argued that there is no intention on the part of the assessee to conceal any income and accordingly the ld AR prayed that the penalty be deleted. 12. The ld. DR submitted that assessee declared the differential rental income and interest income only during the assessment proceedings through revised return of income. The ld DR further submitted that if the case had not been selected for scrutiny the assessee would not have offered the differential income to tax. The ld DR therefore argued that the lower authorities were correct in levying penalty for concealment of income. 13. We heard the parties and perused the material on record. The assessee has filed the original return of income declaring a total income of Rs. 12,05,86,110/-. Subsequently during the course of assessment proceedings when a query is raised by the AO regarding certain interest income and rental income not being disclosed, the assessee filed the revised return of income including the said incomes and declared an income of Rs. 12,28,70,870/-. The AO completed the assessment by assessing the income as per the revised return of income and th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... considered view there is no willful intention on the part of the assessee to conceal the income since the assessee has filed the revised return of income rectifying all the errors in the original return of income. It is also relevant to note that the revised return of income was filed by the assessee on 30.03.2017 and the assessment under section 143(3) was completed on 08.12.2017 where the AO has assessed the income as per the income declared in the revised return by the assessee i.e. revenue has accepted the income declared in the revised return. The below observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hindustan Steel Ltd. v. State of Orissa [(1972) 83 ITR 26 (SC) is relevant in this context Penalty is not to be imposed if there is no conscious breach of law. An order imposing penalty for failure to carry out a statutory obligation is the result of a quasi-criminal proceeding, and penalty will not ordinarily be imposed unless the party obliged, either acted deliberately in defiance of law or guilty of conduct, contumacious or dishonest, or acted in conscious disregard to its obligation. Penalty will not also be imposed merely because it is lawful to do so. Whether p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
