TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (12) TMI 1647
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ges from the order of the ld. CIT(A) is as under:- 3.1.3 I have duly considered assessee's submission and carefully gone through penalty order passed by the AO. I have also perused the facts of the case. On perusal, following points emerge:- (i) The AO levied penalty u/s 271(1)((c) in respect of disallowance of deduction claimed u/s 80IB of the Act amounting to Rs. 4,58,25,167/- by holding the assessee had made a wrong claim of deduction u/s 80IB of the Act. The factual position is that the assessee claimed deduction u/s 80IB on the basis of audit report in Form No. 10CCB.the claim of the assessee was based on legal document named ''Development Agreement''. In the assessment proceedings also, assessee has submitted h....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in the purview of mistake. AO has summarily rejected the explanation of the assessee with regard to the revised return filed. (ii) AO has levied penalty u/s 271(1)(c) on the ground of furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income by the assessee. It is a fact that claims made by the assessee were based on experts advice and backed by certification issued in Form 10CCB. Further, revised return so filed was also a valid return filed within the stipulated time. AR has also relied upon the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court's decision in the case of Chander Pal Bagga & Harshwardhan Chemicals & Minerals Ltd. (supra) wherein it is held that no penalty can be imposed if exemption is claimed on the basis of advice of advocate. Even the Ho....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the ld. CIT(A) and filed the written submission which has been taken into consideration while adjudicating upon the issue in question. 2.4 We have heard the rival contentions and perused the materials available on record. A search was conducted on 22-09-2010 in the case of Shree Ram Group, Jaipur to which the assessee belongs. The assessee is an individual and she derives income from real estate business, and capital gain. The assessee purchased agricultural land and got it converted into residential and commercial plot after getting the same approved from JDA (i.e. Jaipur Development Authority). The assessee filed return of income declaring total income at Rs. 7,11,74,000/-/- on 27-09-2011 u/s 139(1) (Copy at PB Page 8-12). In original ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he department in respect of wrong claim of deduction u/s 80IB. (iii) The revised return is not valid as there was no discovery of any omission or wrong statement in the original return of income. (iv) the immediate source of profit is from sale of land and not from development of project. (v) findings have been noticed by the A.O. at the time of assessment, hence penalty u/s 271(1)(c) can be imposed and there is no overlapping with section 271AAA. (vi) Penalty is imposed for intentionally filling inaccurate particulars of income. The AO thus passed an order under section 271(1) (c) of I.T. Act, 1961 imposing a penalty of Rs. 1,47,78,000/- being 100% of tax leviable on following income treating the same as concealed income of ....