2016 (9) TMI 101

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nciples of natural justice. 2. The d. A.O. has erred in levying the penalty u/s 271(12)(c) under the given facts and circumstances." 2. The brief facts of the case are as under: 2.1 The assessee has been granted registration u/s 12AA w.e.f. Assessment Year 2007-08 vide order dated 06.07.2009 passed by DIT (Exemption). The assessee was not having registration u/s 12AA from the Assessment Year 1999-2000 to 2006-07 and such income of the assessee was not exempted u/s 11 of the Act. The case of the assessee before Ld. A.O. during the assessment proceeding was that the assessee had made an application for registration u/s 12AA on 31.10.2006 with retrospective effect from Assessment Year 1999-2000. For the year under consideration, the a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.....3 Aggrieved by the order passed by Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us now. 3. Ld. A.R. submitted that Ld. A.O. levied penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act without mentioning whether the assessee has concealed the particulars of income or has furnished inaccurate particulars of income He submitted that there is no satisfaction recorded by the Ld. A.O. in the assessment order. Thus, he submitted that the order passed by the A.O. suffer from jurisdictional defect. Ld. A.R. submitted that at no stage the assessee has tried to furnish inaccurate particulars of income. He submitted that the assessee was under genuine impression that it is entitled for exemption being a charitable organization and its activities are well covered under....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on P. Ltd. (2012) 347 ITR 241 (Del.; and vii) Karan Raghav Exports P. Ltd. Vs CIT (2012), 349 ITR 112 (Del.) 3.1 Ld. A.R. submitted that the application dated 31.10.2006 was rejected by the DIT (Exemption) vide order dated 06.07.2009 which was subsequently granted by DIT (Exemption) w.e.f. Assessment Year 2006-07, due to the directions of this Tribunal. Ld. A.R. submitted that no penalty can be levied as the claim of the assessee is based upon a bona fide belief and when allowability of a claim is disputed, n penalty can be levied. 4. On the contrary, Ld. D.R. submitted that the assessee has made the application seeking registration u/s 12A of the Act on the last day of filing of return for the Assessment Year 2006-07. He submitted....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t any person has concealed particulars of his income or furnished inaccurate particulars of such income, then he may direct that such person shall pay by way of penalty stipulated in the aforesaid provision. Then the question is, when an income is said to be concealed so as to attract the penalty provisions. Explanation 1 sets out the circumstances which justifies levy of penalty. It reads as under: "Explanation. 1: Where in respect of any facts material to the computation of the total income of any person under this Act,- (A) Such person fails to offer an explanation or offers an explanation which is found by the Assessing Officer or the Commissioner (Appeals) or the Commissioner to be false, or (B) Such person offers an explanati....