2022 (12) TMI 1270

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e of the same by this common order. 3. For the sake of convenience and clarity, the facts relevant to the appeal in ITA No.286/PUN/2022 for the assessment year 2013-14 are stated herein. ITA No.286/PUN/2022, A.Y. 2013-14 : 4. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the appellant is a partnership firm deriving income under the head "business". The Return of Income for the assessment year 2013-14 was filed on 30.09.2013 declaring loss of Rs.5,09,65,530/-. Against the said return of income, the assessment was completed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, (Central) Circle, Kolhapur ('the Assessing Officer') vide order dated 21.03.2016 passed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') at a total loss of Rs.4,33,10,773/- after....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ment of particulars of income nor it furnished inaccurate particulars of income, the addition was made based on the details furnished by the assessee in the return of income. It was further contended that it was merely inadvertent mistake on the part of the assessee and, therefore, no penalty can be levied. The reliance was also placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Ajaib Singh & Co., 253 ITR 630 (P&H) and the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Flexituff International Ltd. However, the Assessing Officer had rejected the said contention of the appellant that the mistake was inadvertent and proceeded with levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of Rs.23,77,951/- vide penalty orde....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....appellant cannot be held guilty of furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income nor concealing of particulars of income. Since the information filed along with return of income, unequivocally stated that the Helicopter was sold for a consideration of Rs.1,20,78,500/- but, the appellant had failed to reduce the entire consideration received on sale of Helicopter from opening WDV of the block of assets under which the Helicopter falls and offered to tax the excess of sale consideration over opening value WDV of block of the assets. It is not even a case of wrong claim made by the assessee in the return of income. The fact that the entire information regarding the sale of the Helicopter was available in the return of income, an accompanied d....