TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (11) TMI 1417
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rrespective of the fact that the assessee has concealed the income and also submitted inaccurate particulars and also the success sharing bonus received by the assessee is treated as revenue receipt in the hands of the assessee and also overlooked the judicial decisions. 2. The Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a Director of M/s. Mafol Management Consultancy Ltd., having headquarters at Chennai and out of country in Europe, US, Middle East, South and Southeast Asia and filed the Return of Income on 31.03.2010 with the total income of Rs. 1,93,13,945/- and the return of income was processed u/s. 143(1) of the Act and subsequently notices under 143(2) and 142(1) were issued. The Ld. AR of the assessee appeared from time to tim....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....gh Court of Madras and the appeal was admitted vide Tax Case Appeal No. 92/2013 and also granted the interim stay of recovery of tax arrears. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer initiated penalty proceedings and issued notice. In the penalty proceedings, the Ld. AR of the assessee reiterated the submissions of assessment proceedings and discussed on the nature of the receipt being success sharing bonus due to managerial abilities for running the company and cannot be treated as revenue receipt. The Ld. AO relied on the jurisdictional High Court decision and was of the opinion that the assessee has concealed the income particulars of success sharing bonus and levied penalty of Rs. 89,84,690/- vide order u/s. 271(1)(c) dated 30.07.2013. 4. A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....u/s. 271(1)(c) irrespective of the fact that the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars and the assessee has treated this success sharing bonus as capital receipt but the Assessing Officer considered as Revenue income confirmed by the CIT(A) and Tribunal. The CIT(A) has not appreciated that the relinquishment of right emanating from the agreement cannot be capital receipt and relied on the judicial decisions and prayed for allowing the appeal. Contra, the Ld. AR of the assessee vehemently argued that the amount of Rs. 2,67,60,000/-received as a success sharing bonus is debatable and there is no precedents to treat as Revenue Expenditure. 6. The Ld. AR further emphasized that against the order of the co-ordinate bench of this Tribuna....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....se on the part of the assessee in filing the Return of income and the disputed issue of sharing success bonus is debatable to treat as capital or revenue and co-ordinate bench of this Tribunal in the assessee's husband case penalty issue in ITA No. 54/Mds/2015 of Shri Pandia Rajan dated 12.06.2015 has deleted penalty by observing as follows: "We heard both the parties on the issue of leviability of penalty on the facts of the present case. We find there is no dispute before us so far as disclosure of information in the return of income is concerned. Assessee furnished all relevant particulars relating to the impugned receipt. Whatever is relied upon by the Assessing Officer in the penalty proceedings, the same are emanated from the ....