TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (2) TMI 95
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....al loss set off against the current year's income was calculated incorrectly purely due to an inadvertent clerical error on the part of the appellant's Chartered Accountant and not deliberately, and moreover the correct amount of earlier year's carried forward capital loss was already on the record of the Income-tax Department and as such there was neither any "concealment" nor any "furnishing of inaccurate particulars" on the appellant's part. The appellant prays that the penalty of Rs. 3,68,827/- imposed upon the appellant under section 271(1)(c) be deleted as the appellant's case does not fall within the purview of section 271(1)(c) at all. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the penalty of Rs. 3,68,827/- imposed upon the appellant by the AO under section 271(1)(c) as the AO has not specified, in the operative part of his penalty order, whether he is imposing the penalty for "concealment of income" or for "furnishing inaccurate particulars of income" (which are two distinct defaults) and as such the AO's order is vague and bad in law, deserving to be quashed. The appellant therefore pra....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... 25,746 Nil Rs. 25,746 2004-05 31.10.2004 28.10.2004 1621111568 Nil Rs. 10,12,995 Nil Rs. 10,12,995 2005-06 31.07.2005 09.08.2005 1621122261 Rs.9,12,071 Nil Nil Return out of time not eligible for Set off 2006-07 31.07.2006 26.07.2006 1621139242 Rs.31,81,134 Nil Rs. 22,30,042 Set off against the A.Y. 2008-09 Rs. 9,51,092 2010-11 31.07.2010 21.07.2013 E-filed Rs. 2,98,180 Nil Nil Rs. 2,98,180 Total Rs. 22,80,013 4. The A.O on the basis of his aforesaid observations called upon the assessee to explain her claim of excess unabsorbed capital loss as was raised by her in the return of income. The assessee in her reply submitted that the excess claim of brought forward losses had occasioned on account of an inadvertent mistake on the part of her Chartered Accountant. It was submitted by the assessee that earlier her tax related issues were attended and handled by her husband Mr. Jatin Sarvaiya w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....084/- instead of Rs. 48,80,364/- as was raised by her in the return of income. The A.O while assessing the income of the assessee at Rs. 34,28,190/- also initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income as regards the excess claim of set off of the brought forward capital loss for the preceding year against the capital gain for the year under consideration. 5. The A.O thereafter initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) and called upon the assessee to show cause as to why penalty may not be imposed on her for claim of excess brought forward losses against the capital gain for the year under consideration. The assessee submitted before the A.O that the mistake in claiming of excess brought forward capital losses had occasioned on account of a bonafide mistake on the part of her Chartered Accountant who had raised the claim remaining unaware of the fact that the capital loss for A.Y. 2006-07 had already been exhausted against the capital gain of the assessee for A.Y. 2008-09. However, the A.O did not find favour with the explanation of the assessee and imposed a penalty of Rs. 3,68,827/- u/s 271(1)(c). Aggrieved, the assessee carried....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d submitted that as the assessee had in her return of income for the year under consideration, viz. A.Y. 2011-12 claimed excess set off of brought forward losses for the preceding years, therefore, penalty u/s 271(1)(c) was rightly imposed by the A.O and sustained by the CIT(A). 7. We have heard the Ld. Authorized Representatives for both the parties, perused the orders of the lower authorities and the material available on record. We find that our indulgence in the present case is sought for adjudicating as to whether the imposition of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income as regards the excess claim of set off of brought forward capital loss of Rs. 16,80,280/- against the capital gain for the year under consideration is in order, or not. We find that it remains as a matter of conceded fact that the assessee had raised an excess claim of set off of brought forward capital loss of Rs. 48,80,364/- as against its actual entitlement of Rs. 32,00,084/-. We find that the assessee had submitted before the lower authorities, both during the course of the assessment and the penalty proceedings, that the excess claim of the set off of brought forward ca....