2021 (5) TMI 758

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....anoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. In this appeal for Assessment Year (AY) 2014-15, the assessee is aggrieved by confirmation of penalty of Rs. 8,35,565/- u/s 271(1)(c) by Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-37, Mumbai, [in short referred to as 'CIT(A)'] vide impugned order dated 10/07/2018. The assessment for the year was framed by Ld. Assessing Officer (AO) u/s 143(3) on 01/12/20....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....eard the rival submissions and perused relevant material on record. Our adjudication to the subject matter of appeal would be as given in succeeding paragraphs. 4. Facts leading to imposition of penalty are that during assessment proceedings, it transpired that the assessee sold a flat situated at Andheri (West), Mumbai but did not offer the capital gains arising therefrom in the return of inco....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... deduction u/s 54 since the assessee had purchased a new flat within two years. However, it was realized during assessment proceedings that the property sold by the assessee was not entitled for deduction since it was a short-term capital asset. Upon realizing the mistake, the claim was withdrawn. Under these circumstances, the assessee pleaded for dropping of penalty proceedings. However, not con....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....2013 in a new residential flat situated at C-103, Baba Sadan, 4, Bungalows, J.P. Road, Andheri (W), Mumbai which is evident from the copy of agreement as placed on record. The payment of the same was made through bank account on 28/06/2013 and 04/07/2013. Hence, the assessee would have been eligible to claim deduction u/s 54 if the property sold was a long-term capital asset. The assessee has also....