Mere taking a claim not sustainable in law, will not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars regarding income of the assessee

Last updated: 07 July 2012

Court :
INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

Brief :
The assessee is an individual who is the Managing Director of Cadence Design Systems India Pvt.Ltd. For the AY 2004-05, he filed a return of income at `1,75,05,081/- comprising of salary income at `1,02,72,400/- from Cadence Design Systems India Pvt.Ltd. and salary income of `65,97,305/- from Cadence Design System Inc., USA. The assessee has been granted stock option under an incentive stock option agreement dated 17th September, 1993 with Cadence Design Systems, USA. During the year under consideration, the assessee sold the stock options and received the sum of `11,36,829/- on sale of such stock options. The same was declared as long term capital gain. The Assessing Officer assessed the same as short term capital gain and also levied penalty under Section 271(1)(c) thereon at `2,50,102/- being the difference between the tax as short term capital gain and tax as long term capital gain on the sum of `11,36,829/-. The learned CIT(A) cancelled the penalty. Hence, the Revenue is in appeal.

Citation :
Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-46(1), New Delhi. (Appellant) Vs. Shri Jaswinder Singh Ahuja, E-365, Greater Kailash-II, New Delhi – 110 048. PAN : AAAPA2041H. (Respondent)