SOMCHAND P. JHAKARIA,THANE vs. ACIT CIR 1, KALYAN

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5601/MUM/2016Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 January 2018AY 2009-103 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that since the assessee revised the return and disclosed the income before the reassessment notice, there was no concealment of income. The penalty levied was therefore set aside.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an original return of income, which was later revised to declare a higher income before a reassessment notice was issued. The assessment was completed based on the revised return, but a penalty was initiated for not disclosing the income in the original return.

What were the issues?

Whether penalty under Section 271(1)(c) can be levied when income is disclosed in a revised return filed before the issuance of a reassessment notice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “L” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, AM & SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya, Shri M. V. Rajguru
For Respondent: Shri M. V. Rajguru

O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.: This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Thane dated 20.06.2016 and pertains to the assessment year 2009-10.

2.

The grounds of appeal

read as under:

1.

1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and law, the ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the penalty of Rs.2,29,695/- initiated by the Ld. Assessing Officer u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

3. Brief facts of the case are as under:

(A.Y. 2009-10) Shri Somchand P. Jhakaria vs. ACIT The assessee had filed his return of income on 18.02.2010 for the assessment year 2009-10 disclosing total income at Rs.4,72,520/-. The same was processed u/s. 143(1) of the Act on 12.01.2011. The return of income was revised subsequently on 31.03.2010, declaring the total income of Rs.11,42,450/-. Assessee has shown to have derived income from brokerage and from other sources, during the year under consideration.

4.

Subsequently, the assessment was reopened and notice was issued u/s. 148 on 06.03.2013. In the assessment order, the assessment was done on the income shown in the revised return and no addition was made. However, the assessing officer initiated the penalty for not disclosing income in the original return.

5.

In this factual background, penalty proceedings were initiated. Assessee plea that he had disclosed the income and paid the tax suo moto much before the receipt of the reassessment notice was not accepted and penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act amounting to Rs.2,29,695/- was levied.

6.

Upon the assessee's appeal, the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) confirmed the penalty. He inter alia did not accept the assessee's reliance upon the Hon'ble Bombay High Court decision in the case of CIT vs. Hiralal Doshi (in Appeal No. 2331 of 2013 order dated 09.02.2016).

7.

Against this order, the assessee is in appeal before the ITAT.

8.

We have heard both the counsel and perused the records. We find that the assessee has revised its return of income much before the issue of reassessment notice. The reassessment was done on the amount already shown by the assessee in revised return. Hence, there is no case of concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income on the part of the assessee. The reliance placed by the assessee

(A.Y. 2009-10) Shri Somchand P. Jhakaria vs. ACIT on the decision of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court above is germane and supports the case of the assessee. Accordingly, in the background of the aforesaid discussion and precedent we set aside the orders of the authorities below and delete the levy of penalty.

9.

In the result, this appeal by the assessee stands allowed Order pronounced in the open court on 04.01.2018

Sd/- Sd/- (Sandeep Gosain) (Shamim Yahya) �या�यक सद�य / Judicial Member लेखा सद�य / Accountant Member मुंबई Mumbai; �दनांक Dated :04.01.2018 व.�न.स./Roshani, Sr. PS आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 1. ��यथ� / The Respondent 2. आयकर आयु�त(अपील) / The CIT(A) 3. आयकर आयु�त / CIT - concerned 4. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, मुंबई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. गाड� फाईल / Guard File 6. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →