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 Upholds Decision on Income Tax Penalty Deletion</h1> <h3>The Jt. CIT (OSD) Cen. Cir -2 Vadodara Versus M/s. Shreedhar Associates Proje: “Shreedhar Residency” B/s. Sun Pharma Road Baroda</h3> The Jt. CIT (OSD) Cen. Cir -2 Vadodara Versus M/s. Shreedhar Associates Proje: “Shreedhar Residency” B/s. Sun Pharma Road Baroda - TMI Issues:1. Appeal against deletion of penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act.Analysis:Issue 1: Appeal against deletion of penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Income Tax ActThe appeal was filed by the Revenue against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) regarding the deletion of penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act. The Revenue contended that the penalty was justified as the disclosure of 'on-money' income was made only due to the survey action by the Department and was not accounted for in the regular books of account of the assessee at the time of survey. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) allowed the assessee's appeal and deleted the penalty. The Revenue argued that the deletion of penalty was erroneous as the on-money income was not reflected in the regular books of accounts. On the other hand, the assessee relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in a similar case. The Tribunal analyzed the facts and held that the assessee had disclosed the additional business income during a survey operation, which was duly incorporated in the books of accounts and the return of income with taxes paid. The Tribunal noted that the on-money income was admitted by the assessee during the survey and that the conclusion of the Assessing Officer regarding the non-inclusion of the amount in the regular books of accounts was flawed. The Tribunal also referred to the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court, which held that if the disclosed income during the survey was offered to tax and no further addition was made during assessment, the penalty for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income would not apply. The Tribunal upheld the decision of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and dismissed the Revenue's appeal, citing no new facts or circumstances presented to warrant interference.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
