TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (12) TMI 1506
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ons of section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. 2. That the initiation of proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) and consequent levy of penalty of Rs. 1,59,500/- vide order dated 20.3.2013 u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act and subsequently reduced to Rs. 16,090/- vide Notice of demand dated 9.5.2013 deserves to be quashed and cancelled being void, illegal and without jurisdiction. 2. The brief facts of the case are that an AIR information was received by the AO wherein it was mentioned that the Assessee had deposited Rs. 10,17,500/- in his savings bank account with Oriental Bank of Commerce, Khatauli during FY 2008-09. On such basis, the AO requisitioned copy of bank statement and AO found that the Assessee had deposited Rs. 5,00,000/- each on 17.2.2007 and....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and found that peculiar feature of the cash book and find that it contain 9 Ledger Accounts of such persons from whom cash was received from May, 2008 to January, 2009. Assessee was asked to produce 9 persons whose accounts got squared up In March, 2009, but amounts from them were received from May, 2008 to January, 2009. In case of nonproduction of the said persons the Assessee was required to show cause as to why the total amount of Rs. 1, 59,500/- so introduced in cash book could not be treated as assessor's income and added as undisclosed income which tantamount enhancement of income. In response to the same Assessee filed reply which the Ld. CIT(A) has reproduced at Page 2 of the impugned order. The Assessee pleaded that all these ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o penal action. He also held that once the cash introduced in the cash book at Rs. 1,59,500/- the onus was squared up upon the Assessee to establish the genuineness by producing the aforesaid 9 persons for examination, but the Assessee failed to do so and he made the addition of Rs. 1,59,500/- u/s. 68 of the I.T. Act and also held that the Assessee has concealed particulars of his income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of his income and therefore, the onus is on the Assessee to establish his to establish that his failure to return correct income did not arise from any fraud or any gross or wilful neglect on his part. He concluded that the cash deposits created as income from undisclosed sources, burden is on the assessee to prove th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ellate proceedings vide order dated 31.8.2012 and he was agreed to make the addition of Rs. 1,59,500/-. Accordingly, the Ld. CIT(A) in penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) vide order dated 20.3.2013 has imposed the penalty of Rs. 1,59,500/- which was reduced to Rs. 16,090/- by the AO on the application of the Assessee, as there was total addition of Rs. 1,59,500/- to the return income of Rs. 1,43,610/-. This penalty of Rs. 1,59,500/- was further reduced to Rs. 16,090/- vide Notice of Demand dated 9.5.2013, as stated by the Assessee in the grounds of appeal before the Tribunal. We are in agreement with the contention of the Ld. Counsel of the assessee that in the present case there was a change of opinion and no concealment of income or furnis....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....that any details supplied by the Assessee in its return are found to be incorrect or erroneous or false, there is no question of inviting the penalty u/sec. 271(1)(c) of the Act. A mere making a claim, which is not sustainable in law, by itself, will not amount of furnishing inaccurate particulars regarding the income of the Assessee. Such claim made in the return cannot amount to furnishing a inaccurate particulars of income. As the Assessee has furnished all the details of its expenditure as well as income in its return, which details, in themselves, were not found to be inaccurate nor could be viewed as the concealment of income on its part. It was up to the authorities to accept its claim in the return or not. Merely, because the Assess....