TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (5) TMI 484
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t Term Capital Gain declared at Rs. 10,70,72,206/- in the original return based on clerical error was subsequently revised at Rs. 10,87,22,146/- by filing revised return voluntarily and suo moto. On facts and in law it was not a case of furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income warranting application of penal provisions u/s 271(1)(c) of I.T. Act. 2. That on facts and in law the initiation of Penal provisions and resultant levy of penalty of Rs. 5,60,790 based on various grounds and reasoning assigned by the Ld. Assessing Officer was void, illegal, erroneous and without jurisdiction. 3. That the levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) sustained by the Ld. CIT(Appeals) for concealment of income and furnishing inaccurate particula....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... have been given by the assessee has failed to avail them. Since the assessee fails to offer an explanation in this regard, therefore, the case of the assessee is covered by the deeming provision of clause A of explanation 1 of Section 271 (1)(c) and the addition of Rs. 16,49,870/- deemed to represent the income in respect of which particulars have been concealed. It is also pertinent to mention here that assessee has not filed appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) against the assessment order. This reflects that assessee has accepted the addition in principle. Keeping in view of the above facts and circumstance of the case and in the light of above discussion, it is established that the assessee has concealed the particular of income and fu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he has wrongly calculated the cost of acquisition of the land and relied upon the judgment cited as CIT vs. Reliance Petroproducts Pvt. Ltd. - 322 ITR 158 (SC). However, on the other hand, the ld. DR for the relevant relied upon the order passed by the CIT (A). 7. Undisputedly, the assessee has admitted during the scrutiny proceedings that he has enhanced the cost of the acquisition of land, but due to inadvertence, for the purpose of calculating the short term capital gain on sale of land. It is also not disputed that assessee has himself revised the computation of income and paid the balance tax payable. 8. In the backdrop of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the sole question for determination in this case is "as t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... dispute that everything would depend upon the return filed by the assessee, because that is the only document where the assessee can furnish the particulars of his income. When such particulars are found to be inaccurate, the liability would arise. To attract penalty, the details supplied in the return must not be accurate, not exact or correct, not according to the truth or erroneous. Where there is no finding 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 under section 271(1)(c). A mere making of a claim, which is not sustainable in law, by itself, will not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars regarding the income of the ....