TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (10) TMI 639
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the order passed U/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [the Act] for the AY 2011-12. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the assessee, an individual, has not filed her return of income u/s. 139(1) of the Act for the AY 2011-12. As per the information available with the Department, the Ld. AO noted that during the AY 2011-12 the assessee, along with two others, sold land admeasuring 500 sq yds on 6/7/2010 for a consideration of Rs. 42,50,000/ -. The Ld. AO after recording the reasons and taking approval from the competent authority issued a notice u/s. 148 of the Act and called for the assessee to file ITR. The assessee did not respond to the notice. Subsequently, during the assessment proceedings, the Ld. AO issued no....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eaning of section 271(1)(c) of the Act and levied the penalty of Rs. 2,82,897/-. Aggrieved by the penalty order of the Ld. AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC. On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC, the assessee filed the present appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds of appeal: "1. The order of the Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC is contrary to the facts and also the law applicable to the facts of the case. 2. The Ld. CIT (A) ought to have quashed the order passed u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act as invalid as it was passed on the basis of ambiguous notice. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) is not justified in confirming the pe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... provisions of section 50C of the Act. Accordingly, the Ld. AO has considered that the assessee has concealed the particulars of income while filing the return of income which attracts the penal provisions as per section 271(1)(c) of the Act. Further, we also find that in response to the show cause notices issued by the Ld. AO, the assessee has neither filed any explanation nor appeared before the Ld. Revenue Authorities during the penalty proceedings. It is also found that the assessee has not furnished any reasonable cause either for non-filing of return of income or for non-appearance or non-furnishing of explanation during the assessment or penalty proceedings. The Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC has considered all the above facts and observed in 4.2 o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the case of CIT vs. Majunatha Cotton and Ginning Factory [2013] 359ITR 565 along with the Hon'ble Supreme Court order in the case of SSA Emeralds Meadows (CC No. 11485/2016) vide order dt 5/8/2016 order of the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh in ITTA No. 684/2016 in the case of Principal CIT, Visakhapatnam vs. Smt. Baisetty Revathi and two orders of Hon'ble ITAT, Visakhapatnam. Ratios of the two decisions are not applicable as the facts are clearly distinguishable. In the instant case, penalty proceedings have been initiated specifically for concealment of income and the same was held to be established in the penalty order. On perusal of the penalty order, it is evident that the appellant was required to take the value adopted by the st....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h has not been done, thus there was a concealment to the extent of income u/s. 139(1) of the Act nor in response of notice u/s. 148 of the Act, the income under the head capital gain calculated stood undisclosed falling under the meaning of concealment of income. Moreover, the addition was confirmed by the first appellate authority further establishing the concealment of income. Therefore, the penalty imposed u/s. 271(1)(c) cannot be faulted. Hence, I am not inclined to interfere with the decision of the AO and the penalty order is hereby confirmed and the above grounds of appeal are dismissed." Further, we observed that the assessee has not filed her return of income u/s. 139(1) of the Act but has filed in response to the notice u/s. 14....