GST Course
CA Final Online Classes
CA Classes

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act can only be levied when there is concealment of the particulars of the income of the assessee

LinkedIn


Court :
ITAT Pune

Brief :
This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- 6, Pune (‘CIT(A)’ for short)b dated 20.12.2017 for the assessment year 2011-12 in confirming levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’).

Citation :
ITA No.725/PUN/2018

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, PUNE
(Through Virtual Court)

BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM
AND SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM

ITA No.725/PUN/2018
Assessment Year : 2011-12

Siddhesh Shripad Mitkar,
1009, Shripad, Model Colony,
Shivajinagar, Pune-411016.
PAN : ABIPM1182E 
Appellant

V/s.

ITO, Ward-8(3),
Pune. 
Respondent

Assessee by : None
Revenue by : Shri Vitthal Bhosale

Date of Hearing : 01.06.2021
Date of Pronouncement : 01.06.2021

 ORDER

PER INTURI RAMA RAO, AM:

This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- 6, Pune (‘CIT(A)’ for short)b dated 20.12.2017 for the assessment year 2011-12 in confirming levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’).

2. Brief facts of the case are as under :-

 The appellant is an individual engaged in the business of builders and land promoters. The return of income for the assessment year 2011-12 was filed on 31.07.2011 declaring total income of Rs.11,567/-. Against the said return of income, the assessment was completed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-8(3), Pune (‘the Assessing Officer’) vide order dated 07.01.2014  u/s 143(3) of the Act at a total income of Rs.29,67,390/-. While doing so, the Assessing Officer made addition of Rs.29,50,000/- being cash deposits in SB Account treating the same as unexplained cash deposits rejecting the explanation of the assessee that the cash deposits were made out of cash withdrawals through ATM on various dates and also based on the admission of the assessee that to offer the same as income in order to buy peace of mind and avoid litigation and penalty proceedings. The Assessing Officer made another addition of Rs.1,472/- being interest from the Savings Bank Accounts.

3. Being aggrieved by the above additions, an appeal was preferred before the ld. CIT(A)-6, Pune, who vide order dated 23.03.2015 while confirming the additions also made further addition of Rs.9,55,000/- on account of unexplained credit, transfer through ATM. Thus, the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the additions made by the Assessing Officer. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer initiated the penalty proceedings by issuing of show-cause notice u/s 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) of the Act on 07.01.2014 and further show-cause notice was issued on 08.05.2015 and in response to the same, an explanation filed by the assessee stating that the sources for cash deposits were duly explained and mere fact that the appellant had agreed to the addition does not entail levy of penalty. 

To know more in details find the attachment file
 

 

Guest
on 08 June 2021
Published in Income Tax
Views : 18
downloaded 3 times
Report Abuse

LinkedIn







Trending Tags