TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (11) TMI 795
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ferred by the petitioner was dismissed. 2. The facts of the case are that the assessee filed return of income for the assessment year 1996-97 on August 12, 1996, disclosing total income at Rs. 42,020. In the profit and loss account filed along with the return of income, the petitioner had shown labour charges to be paid at Rs. 15,19,030. The Assessing Officer made regular assessment under section 143(3) of the Act on March 31, 1997 determining total income at Rs. 10,86,800. While making assessment, the Assessing Officer accepted payment of Rs. 4,79,243 made to five workers who appeared before him and disallowed Rs. 10,39,787. Being aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer, the petitioner preferred appeal before the Commissioner of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssing Officer was constrained to pass ex-parte order under section 144 of the Income-tax Act as the assessee did not comply with the notices issued by him from time to time. During the course of penalty proceedings also the repeated opportunities allowed to the assessee were not complied with and which establishes that the assessee has concealed his income by furnishing inaccurate particulars of his income." 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. Shah has contended that if we look at the original order, it shows that there is neither concealment nor furnishing inaccurate particulars of income and therefore the penalty order is bad in law. He has relied on the decision of this court in the case of Navnitlal K. Zaveri v. CIT reported in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... removing the garbage. The list of these creditors to whom the amount is payable have been filed and affidavit to the effect for the person concerned have been filed stating thereby the amounts receivable by them from M/s. Devsons Pvt. Ltd. The total amount of Rs. 58,55,005 consists of sundry creditors of Rs. 49,93,063 and other creditors for hire charges of Rs. 8,61,942. Thus, there has been a scrutiny of the amount outstanding towards these eight persons in the subsequent years and at least in one of the assessment orders there is a finding that the amounts were actually due to them and that some of them have filed affidavits also to the effect that the amounts are due to them. At our instance, the learned counsel for the assesse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cer and, therefore, the assessment was made for the assessment years 1998-99. The assessment for the assessment year 1998-99 was over and the assessment order had become final. In these circumstances, the court would not interfere with the assessment order. However, no penalty proceedings were to be initiated and no interest was to be recovered from the assessee if the tax was paid within 60 days." 3.3 Reliance has also been placed on the decision of this court in the case of CIT v. Sonal Construction Co. reported in [2015] 55 taxmann.com 425 (Guj) wherein at paragraph Nos. 6 and 7, it is observed as under : "6. We are taking this view in light of the factual scenario as it emerges and more particularly, paragraph 5 of the reaso....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y worded to avoid litigation, and offer cannot be held to be without bona fides. Penalty imposition solely on the basis of such addition, overlooking the details and explanation filed by the assessee cannot be sustained. In view thereof, we delete the penalty.' 7. We are even supported in our view by the latest decision of the apex court reported in Asst. CIT v. Gebilal Kanhaialal, HUF [2012] 348 ITR 561 (SC) and in the case of Northland Development and Hotel Corporation v. CIT reported in [2012] 349 ITR 363 (SC). The twin decisions will permit us to hold in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue." 3.4 Reliance has been placed on the decision of this court in the case of CIT v. Jyoti Ltd. reported in [2013] 34 taxman....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 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 assessee. Such a claim made in the return cannot amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars." 4. Learned counsel for the Revenue Mr. Mehta has contended dec....