TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1994 (4) TMI 93
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s death the property known as 'Sukh Niwas' devolved on his legal heirs; the assessee and his son Shri R.K. Sukhdeosinhji. Since it was ancestral property it was assessed to tax in the status of HUF comprising of the assessee (mother) and Shri R.K. Sukhdeosinhji (son). This property was further partitioned between the mother and the son and the mother the present assessee, sold the property and thereafter built a new house (used for self residence) the value of which amounting to Rs. 1,09,000, she did not declare in her WT returns for the two years under appeal. The WTO was of the opinion that the assessee had concealed particulars of the wealth to the tune of Rs. 1,09,000 and he accordingly initiated penalty proceedings under s. 18(1)(c) of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... property is the sale proceeds of a property named 'Sukh Niwas' which the assessee had sold for Rs. 4,00,000. The capital gain arising on sale of this property was shown by the assessee herself in her own individual return. Therefore, it is clear that the matter was very clear in her mind and she was not entertaining any doubt about the correct capacity in which she was holding the bungalow. To my mind this is, therefore, a fit case for levy of penalty under s. 18(1)(c) of the WT Act." The WTO accordingly levied a penalty of Rs. 1,09,000, i.e., equivalent to the alleged wealth concealed for the asst. yr. 1972-73 and Rs. 9,000 for asst. yr. 1973-74. 3. On appeal, the learned CWT(A) went through the submissions made by the counsel of th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the wealth from the Department or to file inaccurate particulars of such wealth. Indeed, the correspondence itself shows that the assessee could never have concealed the wealth knowing fully well that she has entered into correspondence with the ITO/WTO in connection with the said property, but having formed a bona fide belief that this property is of HUF and, hence, need not be shown, the assessee did not show it in her return of wealth. Considering all these aspects and case laws cited by the assessee's representative in my opinion, it cannot be said that the assessee had concealed her wealth or had furnished inaccurate particulars of such wealth. Considering all aspects and circumstances of the case, in my opinion, the WTO was not justif....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d families of the country and merely not declaring paltry sum of Rs. 1,09,000 in her WT returns (on which tax effect will be a few hundred rupees) under a bona fide impression that the property belonged to the HUF will not call for a penal action. From the facts reproduced supra, it is evident that the existence of "Sukh Niwas" was in the knowledge of the Department; this property was assessed in the status of HUF: at the time of sale, this property was subjected to proceedings for issuing certificate under s. 230A(1) of the Act; and the capital gains arising out of the sale were assessed to tax. Further, we find that one of the questions which was asked by the ITO as per letter dt. 9th July, 1971, issued to the assessee reads as under: ....