Case Law Details
Tecnotree Convergence Ltd. [now Tecnotree Convergence Private Limited] Vs DCIT (ITAT Bangalore)
Conclusion: Penalty under section 271(1)(c) was not leviable as mere making of a claim which was not sustainable in law, by itself, would not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars regarding the income of assessee.
Held: Assessee wrongly claimed the short term capital loss on certain shares which attracted provisions of section 94 and penalty levied on the amount of Rs.87,048 As such, penalty levied on the amount of Rs.12,86,23,096 to the extent of 100% of tax sought to be evaded. Assessee company submitted that it had disclosed these transactions and from the details furnished by assessee, AO had come to the conclusion that capital loss to the extent of dividend income claimed exempt could not be allowed. He submitted that there was no furnishing of any inaccurate particulars or concealment of income of the assessee. It was under a bonafide belief that it was not covered u/s. 94(7). It was held that merely because assessee had claimed the expenditure, which claim was not accepted or was not acceptable to the revenue, that, by itself, would not attract the penalty under section 271(1)(c). Where there was no finding that any details supplied by assessee in its return were found to be incorrect or erroneous or false there was no question of inviting the penalty under section 271(1) ( c ). A mere making of a claim which was not sustainable in law, by itself, would not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars regarding the income of assessee.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT BANGALORE
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of CIT(Appeals)-15, Delhi dated 13.3.2017 for the assessment year 2009-10.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
