TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (1) TMI 682
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....p;2. The only issue in this appeal of the assessee is against the order of CIT(A) confirming the levy of penalty by the Assessing Officer u/s.271(1)(c ) of the Act for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. 3. Briefly stated facts are that the assessee is earning income mainly on capital gains by dealing in shares and securities and also income from other sources. During the year under consideration the assessee has disclosed business income of Rs. 344/-, short term capital gain of Rs. 49,98,803/- and income from other sources at Rs. 2,92,796/-. Assessing Officer noted that assessee's is engaged in the derivative transaction activity and the income arising out of the same as is to be treated as business income as against capital g....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in its favour treating the activity of buying and selling of shares and trading in derivates and also future & options as investment activity and not business activity. Before us, the ld. Counsel for the assessee stated that assessee has not furnished inaccurate particulars of income as it has furnished all the details relating to her derivative transaction and admittedly the same was correct. According to the ld. Counsel for the assessee there is only change of head of income and there is no addition to the income of the assessee. He admitted that there is tax effect for rate purpose because business income is assessed at higher rate of tax than short term capital gain. The ld. Counsel for the assessee referred to the decision of Hon'....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hat the amount received as premium on redemption of debentures in its computation of income. Further, the Tribunal records that it is not the case of the department that the respondent-assessee had concealed any particulars of income or furnished inaccurate particulars of income by stating incorrect facts. The assessing officer considered the said premium received on redemption of debentures to be taxable under the head income from other sources while the respondent-assessee considered the same to be taxable under the head capital gains. In view of the fact that there is only a change of head of income and in the absence of any facts that the claim of the assessee was not bonafide, the Tribunal deleted the penalty imposed under Section 271(....