Rohit Chatterji Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai)
ITAT Mumbai held that penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act not imposable in absence of wilful intention on the part of the assessee to conceal income since all the errors in original return was rectified vide revised return.
Facts- The assessee is an individual residing in Singapore. During the year under consideration, the residential status of the assessee is resident and ordinarily resident. Accordingly, the assessee filed the return of income in India declaring a total income of Rs. 12,05,86,110/- which included 50% of the rental income from the House Property jointly owned by the assessee along with his wife Ms. Alpana Chatterji in Singapore.
The case was selected for scrutiny 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. AO completed the assessment by making the addition as per the income declared by the assessee in the revised return of income. However, penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) was initiated separately for consultant & furnishing inaccurate particular of income.
