2016 (11) TMI 457

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....-04. The only question of law which is sought to be answered is question no.'C' which reads as under: "Whether the ITAT was justified in law and on facts that mere surrender of a claim does not give any amnesty to the assessee against the penalty and had there been no scrutiny in this case, there would have been no question of any surrender by the assessee?" Briefly stated facts of the case are that the assessee is a partnership firm and is engaged in the business of manufacturing and export of finished leather etc. The assessee filed its return of income on 01.12.2013, declaring the total taxable income of Rs. 2,05,02,305/- for the period 01.04.2002 to 31.03.2003. The assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the Act on ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... (1)(C) was therefore bad. Per contra, learned counsel for the assessee has drawn attention to this court to the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) wherein it clearly records as under: "Admittedly during the course of assessment proceedings, the AO could not lay his hands upon any new source of income other than that declared by the assessee, not there is any additional income discovered by the AO, which has been added to the income declared by the assessee. At the same time there is nothing in record to suggest that the assessee did not disclose its entire income or furnished inaccurate particulars of its income. Whatever agreed addition has come to be made, is only out of the incentives received by the assessee in....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e Tax (Appeals) which has been affirmed by the tribunal. Learned counsel for the assessee has also drawn attention to the court the decision of the Apex Court in the case of CIT versus Reliance Petro Products Pvt. Ltd. reported in (2010) 11 SCC 762 wherein the Apex Court has held in para 18 of the reports which reads as under: "18. We must hasten to add here that in this case, there is no finding that any details, supplied by the assessee in its return were found to be incorrect or erroneous or false. Such not being the case, there would be no question of inviting the penalty under section 271 (1)(C) of the Act. A mere making of the claim, which is not sustainable in law, by itself, will not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars re....