TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (4) TMI 54
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....led for exemption u/s 10(37) of the Act with respect to certain Khasras and accordingly on proportionate basis exemption to the extent of Rs. 73,38,805/- has been disallowed as ingredient of clause (c) are fulfilled and satisfied so as to justify imposition of penalty. The said finding is illegal and unjustified. 2. That the ld.CIT(A) has erred in holding that mere disclosure of exempt income in Schedule E-1 to ROI will not prove the bonafidely of the full disclosure. The said finding is illegal and unjustified. 3. That the ld. CIT(A) has erred in holding that the assessee has made false claim of exemption and in view of these facts and circumstances penalty under section 271(1)(c) has rightly been levied and confirming th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....contrary, the ld. Departmental Representatives opposed the submissions and supported the orders of the authorities below. 4.2 We have heard the rival contentions, perused the material available on records and gone through the orders of the authorities below. One of the ground is that the initiation of the penalty is not as per the provision of law. It is contended that while issuing the notice for initiating penalty proceeding the assessing officer has not specified the charge whether the notice was for concealment of income or furnishing the inaccurate particulars of income. He drew our attention to Paper Book Page No. 3 to demonstrate that the notice is issued on pre-typed performa. He submitted in this regard the reliance is placed on....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....passed by the Commissioner of Income-Tax(Appeals) and the commissioner. (i) The imposition of penalty is not automatic. (j) The imposition of penalty even if the tax liability is admitted is not automatic. (k) Even is the assessee has not challenged the order of assessment levying tax and interest and has paid tax and interest that by itself would not be sufficient for the authorities either to initiate penalty proceedings or impose penalty, unless it is discernible from the assessment order that, it is on account of such unearthing or enquiry concluded by the authorities it has resulted in payment of such tax or such tax liability came to be admitted and if not it would have escaped from tax net and a opined by t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... could be imposed to the assessee. (S) Taking up o penalty proceedings on one limb an finding the assessee guilty of another limb is bad in law. (T) The penalty proceedings are distinct from the assessment proceedings. The proceedings for imposition of penalty though emanate from proceedings of assessment, it is independent and separate aspect of the proceedings. (U) The findings recorded in the assessment proceedings in so far as "concealment of income" and "furnishing of incorrect particulars" would not operate as res judicata in the penalty proceedings. It is open to the assesee to contest the said proceedings on the merits. Howeever, the validity of the assessment or reassessment in pursuance of which penalty ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....was tried to be argued that the falsehood in accounts can take either of the two forms; (i) an item of receipt may be suppressed fraudulently; (ii) an item of expenditure may be falsely) or in an exaggerated amount) claimed, and both types attempt to reduce the taxable income and, therefore, both types amount to concealment of particulars of one's income as well as furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. We do not agree, as the assessee had furnished all the details of its expenditure as well as income in its return, which details, in themselves, were not found to be inaccurate nor could be viewed as the concealment of income on its part. It was up to the authorities to accept its claim in the return or not. Merely because the asses....