1. DCIT Vs. Crew Bos Products Pvt. Ltd., I.T.A. No. 1948/DEL/2013, Date of Order: 08/08/2014, ITAT - Delhi
Penalty cannot be levied U/s 271(1)(c) merely because an amount is not allowed or taxed as income.
Held Yes
Assessee
claimed deduction U/s 80HHC of IT Act, 1961. During the reassessment
proceeding AO disallowed a part of claim made by assessee u/s 80HHC and
held that assessee furnished inaccurate particulars of its income by way
of claiming excess deduction. AO initiated penalty proceeding U/s
271(1)(c) of the Act.
Hon’ble
ITAT held that merely because the assessee’s claim was not accepted or
was not acceptable to the revenue, that by itself would not attract
penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act.
In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed.
(Please click here for judgment)
2. CIT Vs. Shri Samraj Krishan Chaudhary, I.T.A. No. 127 of 2014, Date of Order: 04/08/2014, High Court of Allahabad
Validity of the reopening of assessment has to be determined on the basis of reasons disclosed by the AO.
Held_ Yes
The
notice of reopening of assessment is issued upon assessee on the ground
that assessee sold some property for a consideration which is less than
stamp duty value. ITAT finds that, when assessee computing the capital
gains, took high value i.e. stamp duty value so AO has no reason to
believe that there is in an escapement of income from assessment.
Later on
revenue contended that assessee has reduced capital gain by increasing
the cost of acquisition and improvement. ITAT not appreciated submission
made by revenue since this was not the basis on which assessment was
reopened U/s 148.The validity of the reopening of the assessment has to
be determined on the basis of the reason which was disclosed by AO.
Hon’ble High Court held that the the Tribunal was justified in assessing
the correctness of the notice for reopening the assessment U/s 148 on
the basis of reason which were disclosed by AO.
Hence appeal of revenue is dismissed.
(Please click here for judgment)
New User? 
Subscribe Now