concealment

We have heard both the sides in detail. Thrust given by the C1T(A) on the mens rea reflected in the conduct of the assessee does not survive with usual force, since the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India & Others Vs. Dharmendra Textiles Processors & Ors., 306 1TR 277. The Supreme Court has held in the said case that willful concealment is not essential for attracting civil liability of penalty under Section 271(1 )(c) of the Act. The othe.. Full Article

On careful consideration of relevant facts, I am of the view that important fact stated by the assessee in his reply to penalty notice has not been considered in accordance with law. The revenue authority and the Tribunal in the quantum proceedings proceeded mainly on a presumption that the payment was made through account payee cheque, decided the issue against the assessee and the expenditure claimed was disallowed and added to the income of the assessee. In the penalt.. Full Article

In the case of CIT Vs. Manga Ram & Sons 107 ITR 307 (All.) and in CIT Vs. Sarankhan Siri Sugar Works 246 ITR 216 (All) proposition of the law laid down by the Hon'ble High Court are that if the income is surrendered with the condition that no penalty be imposed on the assessee. The Assessing Officer is not justified in imposing the penalty. Full Article

The burden of proving an understatement or concealment is on the revenue; this burden may be discharged by the revenue by establishing facts and circumstances from which a reasonable inference can be drawn that the assessee has not correctly declared or disclosed the consideration received by him and there is an understatement or concealment of the consideration in respect of the transfer. Full Article

The Delhi Bench of the Income - tax Appellate Tribunal (Delhi Tribunal), in the case of Vertex Customer Services (India) Pvt. Ltd. (the taxpayer) held that exclusion of provision of doubtful debts from the operating expenses being a debatable issue and considering full disclosure made by the taxpayer; the taxpayer could not be held liable for penalty. Full Article

In this article, the proposed amendments by The Finance (No. 2) Bill, 2009 relating to sections 56(2), 57, 145A, 271(1) Explanation 5A and 281B, are briefly discussed. These amendments proposed in the Finance (No. 2) Bill, 2009, are aimed towards rationalizing the provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) in order to bring out the true and correct intention of the legislature for enacting the above provisions. Full Article

Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) empowers the Assessing Officer (“AO”) to levy penalty if he is satisfied that the assessee has concealed the particulars of income or furnished inaccurate particulars of income. A new section 271(1B) was introduced by the Finance Act, 2008 with retrospective effect from 1 April 1989, providing that in a case where an addition/disallowance has been made in computing taxable income/loss, a direction given by.. Full Article

Section 271(1)(c) provides that if the AO or the Commissioner (Appeals) or the Commissioner, in the course of proceedings in this Act is satisfied that any person has concealed the particulars of his income or furnish inaccurate particulars of income, he may direct that such person shall pay by way of penalty a sum which shall not be less than but which shall not exceed three times the amount of tax sought to be evaded by a reason of the concealme Full Article