TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (5) TMI 713
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ax (Appeals) dated December 21, 2009 pertaining to the assessment year 2006-07. The issue raised is that the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the levy of penalty of Rs. 2,17,964 under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act. In this case the main issue involved was the treatment of receipt of Rs.10,03,814. The assessee had shown the income from sale of plants ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ee in Travancore Tea Estates Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1974] 93 ITR 314 (Ker). The apex court has held that the receipt on transfer of trees is not a revenue receipt, but capital receipt in Commr. of Agrl. I.T. v. Kailas Rubber and Co. Ltd. [1966] 60 ITR 435 (SC). Further, on perusal of the sale deed it is observed that the sale proceeds was arbitrarily bifurcated into the value of the land and the value o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bservation of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) in the quantum appeal and held that no logical basis for the bifurcation and valuation has been given by the assessee. Hence he confirmed the levy of penalty. Against this order the assessee is in appeal before us. We have heard the assessee and the learned Departmental representative. We find that penalty in this case has been l....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., were existing. In the earlier years the assessee had been claiming income from such agricultural activity. Now the assessee has furnished all the necessary particulars and made a claim. There was no concealment of particulars. It was only the Assessing Officer's opinion that being composite sale the assessee's claim cannot be accepted. The claim of the assessee cannot be construed as ex facie bo....