The crux pertains to levying penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for alleged furnishing of inaccurate particulars or...

The crux pertains to levying penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for alleged furnishing of inaccurate particulars or concealment of income regarding capital gains computation on sale of land. The Tribunal held that adopting a different valuation for determining cost of acquisition based on estimation cannot be the basis for imposing penalty. The capital gains were computed by the assessee based on estimated cost as on 1.4.1981, which the Assessing Officer disagreed with and adopted the fair market value mentioned in the sale deed dated 17.11.1980 without referring to the District Valuation Officer. This recomputation based on material furnished by the assessee cannot attract penalty. Mere difference in estimation of cost by the authorities does not prove..... .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X