2022 (2) TMI 875

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e Income-tax Act, 1961 ("the Act" in short). 2. The assessee in the present case is an individual who derives income from investments. The return of income for the year under consideration was filed by her on 26.10.2012 declaring total income of Rs. 18,04,070/-. In the said return, Long Term Capital Gain of Rs. 17,14,940/- arising from the sale of immovable properties was declared by the assessee. While computing the said Long Term Capital Gain, the sale consideration of the immovable properties was taken by the assessee at Rs. 1,79,48,414/- as against the Stamp Duty Valuation (Jantri Value) of Rs. 3,62,53,993/-. In this regard, it was explained by the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings before the learned Assessing Offi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... CIT(A); and, after considering the submissions made on behalf of the assessee as well as the material available on record, the learned CIT(A) cancelled the penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act for the following reasons given in paragraph 3.3 of his appellate order dated 20.09.2017:- "3.3. I have considered the submissions of the learned Authorized Representative and the order of the Assessing Officer. The only issue is regarding penalty levied u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act on account of difference in Long Term Capital Gain. The A.O. observed that the assessee was in agreement with the valuation and consequent addition on account of LTCG. By agreeing to the additions the assessee is not absolved f....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d. Tax Corp 61569 (v) Renu Hingorani Vs ACIT ITA No.2210/Mum/2010 & various other relevant judicial pronouncements. In the case of Madan Theatares Ltd Vs CIT (2014) 44 taxmann.com 382 (Calcutta), it was held that "Section 271(1)(c), read with section 50C of the Income-tax Act, 1961, Penalty for concealment of income, Where actual amount received on account of sale of property was offered for taxation but Assessing Officer invoking section 50C deemed sale consideration at higher sum, in absence of any iota of evidence that assessee had received more amount than that shown by it, penalty under Section 271(1)(c) was not leviable. The assessee can challenge the view of the A.O. if there is a dispute in the valuation adopt duri....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... In the present case, the A.O. has accepted the amount offered by the assessee as her income and levied penalty without making any enquires and investigation to disprove that the explanation given by the assessee is either false or bona fide. Therefore, it is my considered view that the penalty cannot be levied in the present case when the appellant disclosed all material facts truly and wholly. Merely because the assessee agreed for addition on the basis of valuation made by the Stamp Valuation Authority would not be a conclusive proof that the sale consideration as per this agreement was incorrect and wrong. Accordingly the addition because of the deeming provisions does not ipso facto attract the penalty u/s 271(1) (c ). Hence in v....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hat whatever difference is there is concealed income and leviable for penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the IT Act. 5. At the time of hearing fixed in this case none has appeared on behalf of the respondent-assessee. Even the notice sent to the assessee at the address available on record has come back undelivered from the Postal Authority with the remark "left". It is noted that there was similar non-compliance on the part of the assessee when this appeal was fixed for hearing on the earlier occasions. This appeal of the Revenue is, therefore, being disposed of ex-parte qua the respondent-assessee, after hearing the arguments of the learned Departmental Representative and perusing the relevant material available on record. 6. Apropos the issue....