Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was leviable where capital gains were recomputed by applying section 50C without any material showing receipt of higher consideration than the sale deed value.
Analysis: The assessee had disclosed the sale consideration stated in the registered sale deed, and no evidence was brought on record to show that any amount over and above that consideration had actually been received. A mere substitution of value under section 50C, even through reference to the Valuation Officer, does not by itself establish concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars. Penalty under section 271(1)(c) requires a factual foundation showing that the return contained incorrect particulars or that income was concealed; absent such material, the deeming exercise for capital gains computation cannot automatically sustain penalty.
Conclusion: Penalty under section 271(1)(c) was not attracted and was deleted.
Final Conclusion: The appeal was allowed and the penalty addition did not survive.
Ratio Decidendi: In the absence of evidence that the assessee received more consideration than that disclosed in the registered sale deed, application of section 50C for capital gains computation does not, by itself, justify penalty for concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars under section 271(1)(c).