Case Law Details
Ashvin Narayan Bajoria (HUF) Vs ITO (ITAT Surat)
Recently the SMC Bench of Surat Income Tax Appellate Tribunal passed a judgement in the aforementioned case deleting the penalty levied by the Ld. Assessing Officer under section 271(1)(c) of the Act for concealment of income. The central point of discussion was whether or not penalty imposed by Ld. Assessing Officer u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for concealing of income was justifiable in the light of the law, given that the assessee had furnished the additional income in the return of income filed in response to notice served u/s 148 of the Act.
Issue : The assessee is a Hindu Undivided Family (HUF), filed his return of income declaring of Rs.2,00,990/- on 19.02.2013 for AY 2012-13. Subsequently on basis of information received from Investigation Wing, Ahmedabad, the Ld. Assessing Officer found that assessee has made transaction in Penny Stock Scrip of ‘Twenty First Century’. On the basis of such information, the Ld. Assessing Officer recorded the reasons and reopened the case u/s 147 of the Act and issued notice u/s 148 of the Act. In response to the above notice, the assessee filed his return of income declaring Rs.31,68,390/- out which income amounting to Rs.29,67,398/- was related to income earned on transfer of shares of ‘Twenty First Century’ and the tax on the disclosed income was promptly paid.
The Ld. Assessing Officer accepted the income declared in the revised return without any variation, completed the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Act and initiated penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act @ 100% of the tax sought to be evaded.
Being aggrieved by the order of Ld. Assessing Officer the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) where he got no relief and further aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A) the assessee filed an appeal before the Hon’ble ITAT.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
