TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal overturns penalties under Income Tax Act, emphasizes cooperation and accurate computations</h1> <h3>VBC Jewellers Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Non-Corporate Circle-2, Chennai</h3> VBC Jewellers Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Non-Corporate Circle-2, Chennai - TMI Issues Involved:Penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act for assessment years 2009-10 & 2010-11.Analysis:Issue 1: Penalty ImpositionThe appeals were filed by multiple assessees against the penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act for the assessment years 2009-10 & 2010-11. The crux of the issue in both cases was the sustenance of penalties by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) based on discrepancies found during a survey conducted at the business premises of the assessees. The penalties were imposed due to additions made as a result of the survey proceedings, which the assessees argued were due to impurity in stock and related arithmetic computations, not concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars. The assessees had accepted the discrepancies found during the survey and filed their income tax returns accordingly.Issue 2: Tribunal's DecisionThe Tribunal carefully considered the contentions put forth by the assessees' Authorized Representative and found merit in their arguments. It was noted that the discrepancies in stock arose from impurities in gold and silver, requiring accurate arithmetic computations for reconciliation. The assessees accepted the computations made by the Assessing Officer to avoid prolonged litigation and filed their returns accordingly. The Tribunal referred to a previous decision where penalties were deleted in a similar situation, emphasizing that there was no concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars. Therefore, the Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to delete the penalties imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Act for all relevant assessment years in both cases.ConclusionThe Tribunal allowed all four appeals of the assessees, emphasizing that the penalties were unjustified given the circumstances surrounding the discrepancies found during the survey. The decision highlighted the importance of accurate computations and the assessees' cooperation in resolving the issues without any intent to conceal income. The judgment serves as a precedent for cases where penalties are imposed based on survey findings without evidence of deliberate wrongdoing.---
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
