TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (10) TMI 781
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cer reopened the assessment by issuing notice under Section 148. Thereafter, the assessment was completed under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 in which the loss declared at Rs. 44,37,933/- was accepted. However, the book profit chargeable to tax under Section 115JB was calculated at Rs. 14,48,929/-. The Assessing Officer levied penalty under Section 271(1)(c) for failure of the assessee to disclose the book profit which was chargeable to tax under Section 115J. The same is sustained by the CIT(A). Hence, this appeal by the assessee. 4. At the time of hearing before us, it is submitted by the learned counsel that non-disclosure of book profit in the computation of income was an inadvertent omission because, alongwith the return of income, the assessee had furnished the profit & loss account and balance sheet which clearly show the book profit of Rs. 22,02,447/-/ Thus, there was no concealment of the primary fact. It was only the inadvertent mistake of the assessee's counsel in not calculating the book profit chargeable under Section 115JB in the computation of income. He submitted that the omission was not only on the part of the assessee's counsel but also on the part of the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y stated that the provision for payment was not allowable under section 40A(7) of the Act indicates that the assessee made a computation error in its return of income. Apart from the fact that the assessee did not notice the error, it was not even noticed even by the Assessing Officer who framed the assessment order. In that sense, even the Assessing Officer seems to have made a mistake in overlooking the contents of the Tax Audit Report. 19. The contents of the Tax Audit Report suggest that there is no question of the assessee concealing its income. There is also no question of the assessee furnishing any inaccurate particulars. It appears to us that all that has happened in the present case is that through a bona fide and inadvertent error, the assessee while submitting its return, failed to add the provision for gratuity to its total income. This can only be described as a human error which we are all prone to make. The calibre and expertise of the assessee has little or nothing to do with the inadvertent error. That the assessee should have been careful cannot be doubted, but the absence of due care, in a case such as the present does not mean that the assessed is guilty of ei....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... condition and procedure prescribed under the statute have not been satisfied and complied with. (ii) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the order passed by A.O. as the reassessment proceedings initiated by the learned A.O. are bad in the eye of law as the reasons recorded for the issue of notice under Section 148 are bad in the eye of law and are contrary to the facts. 4 (i) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by the learned AO is bad both in the eye of law and on facts as the same has been reopened on the basis of reasons without there being any whisper that the income has escaped due to the failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment, as the same has been reopened after a period of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year and the assessment has already been made under Section 143(3) of the Act. (ii) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law, in confirming the order despite the fact that the assessee has already disclosed fully and truly all material facts necessary fo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the penalty despite the fact that the application of the assessee before the Hon'ble Settlement Commission was admitted for the said assessment year and as such the proceedings are bad in law. 8. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in confirming penalty u/s 271(1)(c) as no finding has been given on merit regarding concealment in the order passed by the A.O. 9. The appellant craves leave to add, amend or alter any of the grounds of appeal." 10. At the time of hearing before us, it was pointed out by the learned counsel that for AY 2003-04, the assessee has filed the petition before the Hon'ble Settlement Commission which admitted the same vide order dated 18th September, 2006 passed under Section 245D(1). He stated that as per provisions of Section 245F(2), once an application is admitted by the Settlement Commission, all jurisdiction lies with the Settlement Commission and not with the income tax authorities. That appeal in ITA No.6257/Del/2012 has originated from the assessment order passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 on 31st December, 2009 while the appeal in ITA No.6258/Del/2012 originated from the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n passed under Section 245D(1) on 19th June, 2006 wherein the assessee's second application was admitted. That Section 245F(2) of the Income-tax Act reads as under:- 245F. (2) Where an application made under section 245C has been allowed to be proceeded with under section 245D, the Settlement Commission shall, until an order is passed under sub-section (4) of section 245D, have, subject to the provisions of sub-section (3) of that section, exclusive jurisdiction to exercise the powers and perform the functions of an income-tax authority under this Act in relation to the case : [Provided that where an application has been made under section 245C on or after the 1st day of June, 2007, the Settlement Commission shall have such exclusive jurisdiction from the date on which the application was made: Provided further that where-- (i) an application made on or after the 1st day of June, 2007, is rejected under sub-section (1) of section 245D; or (ii) an application is not allowed to be proceeded with under sub-section (2A) of section 245D, or, as the case may be, is declared invalid under sub-section (2C) of that section; or (iii) an application is not allowed to be further proceede....