TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (3) TMI 1043
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....,26,776/- imposed by the A.O. u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act." 2. Admittedly the brief facts of the present case are as under: 2.1 The assessee is engaged in the business of investments and trading in shares and securities. Assessee had filed its original return of income under section 139 of the act on 28/10/2005 declaring total loss of Rs. 1,45,77,465/-. A search and seizure operation under section 132 of the Act was carried out on 17/03/2010 in the case of Punj Lloyd group of cases. During the course of the search carried out at different premises located in India in Punj Lloyd group, the case of assessee was also covered. Various documents and data storage devices etc. belonging to the assessee company were found and seized. 2.2 Cons....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....10.2010 declaring loss of Rs. 20,450/- which inter alia includes disallowance of deferred revenue expenditure amounting to Rs. 1,05,077/- and long term capital loss of Rs. 1,45,77,465/-. As regard levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) on account of difference in income declared in original return of income filed under section 139 and return of income filed under section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, we would like to submit that the said difference was due to inadvertent mistake in claiming deferred revenue expenditure amounting to Rs. 1,05,077/- in the return of income filed u/s 139 of the' Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee voluntarily rectified the said mistake in his return of income filed under section 153A after consideri....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ction 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax, no penalty is leviable in the instant case because it is applicable only in those cases where during the search the assessee is found to the owner of some unaccounted assets and the such unaccounted assets have not been declared in the return of income filed under Section 153A. Therefore, from the above discussion, I find that in the present case the conditions laid down in Section 271(1) (c) are not being fulfilled as "inaccurate particulars" means the details filed in the return of income are not accurate or exact or correct according to truth or erroneous." 4. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT (A) the revenue is in appeal before us now. 5. The Ld. DR submitted that search seizure operation ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y the authorities below and the decisions relied upon by both the sides. 7.1 On perusal of the copies of the return of income filed under section 139 and 153A of the Act, we observe that the difference in the return filed under section 153A was due to the loss shown under the head 'income from business and profession'. The Ld.AR submitted that there was omission in the original return to include the deferred tax expenditure while calculating income under the head business and profession amounting to Rs. 1,05,077/- in the return of income filed u/s.139 of the Act. He submitted that while filing the return in lieu of notice under section 153A, the assessee rectified this error voluntarily declaring loss of Rs. 20,450/-. 7.2. Further fro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ved gratuity fund unlike other employees of the assessee that. The assessee therein, had claimed deduction thereof in its return of income and on realising the mistake assessee therein revised its return. Hon'ble Supreme Court also observed that in the tax audit report filed along with the return had stated that the provision for payment was not allowable under section 40A(7) of the Act and that 'to such peculiar facts', imposition of penalty u/s.271(1) (c ) was not justified. In the case before Hon'ble Supreme Court, the assessment was not under section 153A or 153C. 7.5. The assessment year involved in the present case before us is 2005-06 and search was carried out on 17/03/2010. Explanation 5A to sec.271(1) (c ) has been inserted by ....