TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (9) TMI 889
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ether in spite of the fact that the income was surrendered by the assessee before the Assessing Officer and tax thereon was deposited, the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has committed substantial illegality in deleting the additions on account of the alleged bogus capital gains and also without opportunity to carry on necessary enquiries by the assessing officer". The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual, who had income from partnership firm, dividend interest. In the return, it was declared that the assessee was having the capital gain bonds in NABARD worth Rs.20.00 lacs, which was purchased through M/s. Goyal Achal Sampati. Later, it was sold for a consideration of Rs.20,54,592/-. The capital gain was wor....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....gned order passed by the Tribunal. He submits that during the course of regular assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer referred the matter to the Additional Director of Income-tax (Investigation), Ahmedabad, who made enquiries from the said company, namely, M/s. Goyal Achal Sampati. The Additional Director of Income-tax has informed that in the record of the company, the name of the assessee did not appear. The claim of the assessee that the consideration was received through the broker M/s. CMS Security Ltd., was not considered by the AO. Learned counsel further submits that the amount was offered in good faith just to buy peace with the Department so that no penalty whatsoever would be initiated. He read out the assessee's letter,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... it merely contained a conditional agreement about change of head of income, it is to be seen as to whether the assessment has to be made as per the provisions of law, or as per the statement made by the assessee. To support his arguments, learned counsel relied on the ratio laid down in the following cases:- (i) Vinod Solanki vs. Union of India & Anr., in Civil Appeal No. 7407 of 2008 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 3537 of 2008); (ii) Shri Krishan vs. Kurikshetra University, AIR 1976 SC 376; (iii) Nagubai Ammal vs. B. Shamal Rao, AIR 1956 SC 593; (iv) Avadh Kishore Dass vs. Ram Gopal, (1979) AIR 861 (SC); (v) Suchitra Component Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise Guntur, (2006) 12 SCC 452; (vi) Commissioner of Income-tax vs. K. Bhuv....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sary for a buyer to have DMAT account in respect of transactions. In the remand report, the first appellate authority submitted that the assessee was claiming exemption but at the same time she surrendered the amount for tax being undisclosed amount. In the instant case, there is no concealment on the part of the assessee regarding the transactions. All the transactions were duly disclosed. If the income as per law is exempted, then the offer of the assessee is meaningless as the law will prevail and will supersede the "offer" made by the assessee. In the instant case, surrender was to buy the peace as the assessee is not an expert in income tax matter. The Department cannot take the advantage of the ignorance of the assessee as per CBDT C....