2009 (7) TMI 22

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tanding Counsel for the revenue. None for the assessee. JUDGMENT Adarsh Kumar Goel, J. - The revenue has preferred this appeal under section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, 'the Act') against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh, passed in ITA No.136/CHD/2008 dated 30.5.2008, for the assessment year 2005-06, proposing to raise following substantial quest....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ts return claimed set off on account of capital loss against profits of business, which was disallowed and penalty proceedings were initiated. Finally, penalty was imposed for 'furnishing inaccurate particulars'. The CIT(A) deleted the penalty holding that set off was claimed by counsel's negligence which view was upheld by the Tribunal. The Tribunal observed as under:- "8. We have given our ca....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on sale of machinery is not allowable to be set off against the profits of business. He has confronted the assessee and the assessee on realizing the mistake committed by the counsel, has accepted the decision of the Assessing Officer in disallowing the loss. In our considered view, the facts and circumstances of this case do not justify an inference that the assessee has concealed the income or f....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 277, the penalty could not be deleted. 5. We are unable to accept the submission. The judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Dharmendra Textile (supra) cannot be read as laying down that in every case where particulars of income are inaccurate, penalty must follow. What has been laid down is that qualitative difference between criminal liability under section 276C and penalty under section 2....