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

The grounds of appeal

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.

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.

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.

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).

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

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

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