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 Income Tax Penalty Due to Lack of Proof, Acknowledges Genuine Evidence from Assessee.</h1> <h3>Robbs Traders & Finance Pvt. Limited Versus Assessing Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC), Income Tax Department, Kolkata</h3> Robbs Traders & Finance Pvt. Limited Versus Assessing Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC), Income Tax Department, Kolkata - TMI Issues involved:The judgment involves an appeal against the levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income.Summary:Issue 1: Levy of Penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax ActThe assessee contested the penalty imposed by the ld. Assessing Officer for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. The ld. Assessing Officer initiated penalty proceedings based on the disallowance of a claimed loss amounting to Rs.5,24,170. The assessee argued that it engaged in genuine trading of shares through a recognized stock exchange with transactions conducted via banking channels and supported by documentary evidence. The ld. Assessing Officer imposed a penalty of Rs.1,94,760 despite the assessee's explanations and evidence. The ld. CIT(Appeals) upheld the penalty.Separate Judgment:In a detailed analysis, the Tribunal found that the ld. Assessing Officer failed to demonstrate that the claimed loss was bogus. The assessee voluntarily admitted the loss to avoid litigation but contested the penalty proceedings. The Tribunal noted that the ld. Assessing Officer summarily rejected the assessee's arguments without proper consideration. The Tribunal highlighted that the assessee provided genuine documentary evidence to support its trading activities, including transactions through a broker, banking channels, and various statements. The Tribunal concluded that the penalty was unjustified as the ld. Assessing Officer did not prove the falsity of the assessee's explanations or evidence.In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, emphasizing the lack of evidence to support the imposition of the penalty. The order was pronounced in open court on October 10, 2023.
TaxTMI 