TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (7) TMI 742
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e record carefully. It emerges out from the record that the assessee has filed its return of income on 29.10.2007 showing total income at Rs. 16,63,938/- and assessment was finalized under section 143(3) on 4.12.2009, determining the total income at Rs. 26,33,040/-. The ld.AO has made addition of Rs. 9,69,102/- out of the claim of depreciation. It is pertinent to observe here that the assessee has claimed depreciation at the rate of 100% on centering material, because value of each item was less than Rs. 5,000/-. This claim of the assessee was disallowed. The ld.AO has made addition of Rs. 9,69,102/- by observing as under: "3. On verification of depreciation chart, it is seen that assessee has claimed depreciation at the rate of 100% ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....00/- and after verification of this fact, this issue be decided again. The ld.AO while giving effect to the order of the ld.CIT(A) passed an order under section 154 on 26.7.2013 and reconfirmed the addition. The issue again travelled to the CIT(A). The ld.CIT(A) has directed for grant of depreciation at the rate of 15%. This issue, thereafter travelled to ITAT and the Tribunal in ITA No.758/Ahd/2011 dismissed the appeal of the Revenue. In this way, it appears that the depreciation was granted to the assessee at the rate of 15%. The ld.AO has initiated penalty proceedings and imposed a penalty of Rs. 3,26,200/- which is equivalent to the tax sought to be evaded. 7. Appeal to the ld.CIT(A) did not bring any relief to the assessee. 8. Be....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e of course of any proceedings under this Act, is satisfied that any person (a) and (b) ** ** ** (c) has concealed the particulars of his income or furnished inaccurate particulars of such income. He may direct that such person shall pay by way of penalty. (i)and (Income-tax Officer,)** ** ** (iii) in the cases referred to in Clause (c) or Clause (d), in addition to tax, if any, payable by him, a sum which shall not be less than, but which shall not exceed three times, the amount of tax sought to be evaded by reason of the concealment of particulars of his income or fringe benefit the furnishing of inaccurate particulars of such income or fringe benefits: Explanation 1- Where in respect of any facts material to the computatio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....urnished inaccurate particulars, in certain situation, even without there being anything to indicate so, statutory deeming fiction for concealment of income comes into play. This deeming fiction, by way of Explanation-1 to section 271(1)(c) postulates two situations; (a) first whether in respect of any facts material to the computation of the total income under the provisions of the Act, the assessee fails to offer an explanation or the explanation offered by the assessee is found to be false by the Assessing Officer or Learned CIT(Appeal); and, (b) where in respect of any fact, material to the computation of total income under the provisions of the Act, the assessee is not able to substantiate the explanation and the assessee fails, to pro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssee was factually incorrect. In other words, he has demonstrated that it was a false claim. He made reference that originally the item was purchased by P.C. Snehal Construction Company and not the assessee. Thus, the disallowance was not made merely on the basis of difference of opinion between the assessee and the AO. The ld.First Appellate Authority has made reference to the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Zoom Communications, 327 ITR 510 for holding that the penalty required to be imposed upon the assessee. The assessee nowhere rendered an explanation that what has operated in his mind while filing the return for claiming depreciation at the rate of 100%. The provision of allowing 100% depreciation on the....