Just a moment...

Top
Help
AI Drafter

Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.

Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review

The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.

• Review the issues identified by the AI
• Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required


Step 2 – Draft Generation

Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.

• Relevant statutory provisions
• Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations
• Issue-wise legal analysis
• Practical arguments and supporting content
• Professionally structured draft ready for further review.

Try Now
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2016 (10) TMI 706

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rder dated 20-12-2008 passed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") read with section 254C of the Act. The penalty under dispute was levied by the ITO, Ward- 2(2) (2), Mumbai u/s 271 (1) (c) of the Act vide order dated 29-03-2006. 2. The only issue in this appeal of the assessee is against the order of the CIT (A) confirming levy of penalty u/s 271 (1) (c) of the Act amounting to Rs. 20,04,501/-. 3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in investment and also in share trading. The assessee has claimed trading loss on account of purchase and sales of share of other companies at Rs. 50,12,977/- as business loss but, the AO treated the same as speculation loss in acc....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....income. This has been also proved by the Assessing Officer at the time of assessment proceedings as well as by the CIT (A) at the appellate stage, resulting in dismissing the appeal. Therefore, it is a fit case for levy of penalty under section 271 (1) (c)". The learned Counsel for the assessee argued that the AO himself is not sure of charge whether the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of income or concealed the particulars of his income. According to him, it means that the AO himself is not satisfied about the specific charge. As far as the penalty u/s 271 (1) (c) of the Act on merits is concerned, the learned Counsel for the assessee relied on the decision in the case of ACIT Vs Sudarshan Fiscal Services (P.) Ltd. reporte....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....wrong claim for set off of share trading loss against other income treating t he same as normal business loss. The penalty imposed by the AO under s. 271 (1) (c) however was held to be not sustainable by the learned CIT (A) as well as by the Tribunal and when the matter reached the Hon'ble Delhi High Court, it was held by their Lordships that, mere treatment of the business loss as speculation loss by the AO does not automatically warrant inference of concealment of income. It was held that the assessee having filed full details of sale of shares, it cannot be said that any particulars of his income were concealed by him so far as his computation of income was concerned. As the issue involved in the present case as well as all the material ....