2021 (1) TMI 884

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....gal, bad in law, and without jurisdiction as assessing officer has not mentioned in notice U/s 271 (l)(c) under which violation he has issued notice. 2. That in view of the facts and circumstance of the case the CIT (A) has erred in law and on facts in imposing the penalty of Rs. 4,27,082.00 U/s 271 (1) (c). 3. That, the Provisions of U/s 271(l)(c) are not at all applicable, in the facts and circumstances, because the appellant had neither concealed particulars of income nor had not filed inaccurate particulars of income and the CIT (A) has failed to appreciate that the additions are made mere on presumptions and mere change of head of income. 4. That, the CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that the assessing officer....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rest paid on TDS and sales tax as well as addition of Rs. 13,16,325/- relating to rental income treated as income from other sources. The assessee did not file the appeal against the assessment order as there is no tax evasion. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer initiated the penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) and imposed penalty of Rs. 4,27,082/- vide order dated 16/7/2018. 4. Being aggrieved by the penalty order, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. 5. The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee company has already declared the receipt of Rs. 2,40,00,000.00 as Rental Income under the Head of income From House Property and claimed the standard deduction @30% of Rs. 72,00,000.00 u....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nder the head of Income from House Property, whereas the Assessing Officer is of the view that the receipt is to be taxed under the head of Income from Other sources, therefore, the addition is made due to change of head of income, which is not justifiable for imposing the penalty for the charge of furnishing an inaccurate particulars of income. The Ld. AR relied upon the following decisions:- a) ACIT vs. Krishna C. Tandon (HUF) in ITA No. 2048/Mum/2016 (Mum. Tri.) b) CIT vs. Bennett Coleman & Co. Ltd. 33 Taxmann.com 227(Bom. HC) c) Price Waterhouse Coopers vs. CIT 348 ITR 306 (SC) d) CIT vs. Societex ITA No. 1190/2017 dated 19.07.2012 6. The Ld. DR relied upon the order of the Assessing Officer as wel....