SIGN IN SUBSCRIBE

News Update

Sun releases two solar storms - Earth has come in its wayRequisite Checks for Appeals - RespondentInheritance Tax row - A golden opportunity to end 32-years long Policy Paralysis on DTCThe Heat is on: Preserving Earth's Climate in the Face of Global WarmingVAT - Timeline for frefund must be followed mandatorily while recovering dues under Delhi VAT Act: SCIndia, Australia to work closely for collaborative projectsCX - All the information was available to department in 2003 itself, therefore, SCN issued four years after gathering information is not sustainable and is highly barred by limitation: HCPowerful voices of amazing women leaders resonated at UN HqsCX - Clearance to sister concern for captive consumption - Department cannot compel assessee to perpetuate the illegality and in such circumstances the whole exercise was revenue neutral: HC75 International visitors from 23 countries arrive to watch world's largest elections unfoldCentre asks States to improve organ donation frequencyCus - Revenue involved in the appeal filed by Commissioner is far below the threshold monetary limit fixed by the CBEC, therefore, department cannot proceed with this appeal - Appeal stands disposed of: HCPM says NO to religion-based reservationCus - Export of non-basmati rice - Since the objective of Central Government in imposing ban with immediate effect was to avert a food crisis in the country, a strict compliance of exemption conditions would further the said intent of the Notification(s): HCAdani Port to develop port in PhilippinesKiller floods - 228 killed in Kenya + 78 in BrazilI-T - Grant of registration u/s 12A can't be denied by invoking Sec 13(1)(b), as provisions of section 13 would be attracted only at time of assessment and not at time of grant of registration: ITATFlight cancellation case: Qantas accepts USD 66 mn penaltyI-T- Joint ownership in two residential properties at the time of sale of the original asset does not disentitle the assessee to claim of deduction under section 54F of the Act: ITATIsrael shuts down Al Jazeera; seizes broadcast equipmentIndia to wait for Canadian Police inputs on arrest of men accused of killing Sikh separatist: JaishankarUS Nurse convicted of killing 17 patients - 700 yrs of jail-term awarded
 
I-T - Claim of deduction based on inaccurate particulars, prohibited under Act, cannot be said to be bona fide mistake and thus, deserve penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of Act: HC

By TIOL News Service

MUMBAI, JAN 08, 2018: THE issue before the Bench is - Whether claim of deduction by the assessee based on inaccurate particulars, which is prohibited under the Act, cannot be said to be a bona fide mistake and thus, deserve penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. And the HC verdict is YES.

Facts of the case

The Assessee-company, engaged is in the business of letting out of immovable property, filed its return for the AY under consideration. In its return the Assessee had claimed benefit of Section 54 of the Act on the ground that the gain made on the sale of immovable property, namely a residential premises was not chargeable to long term capital gains as the same had been invested in acquiring new residential properties. However, during the assessment proceedings, the AO found that the Assessee being a company was not entitled to claim deductions u/s 54 of the Act as the deduction was available only to individuals and Hindu Undivided Family (HUF). Therefore,the AO disallowed the claim for deduction u/s 54 of the Act, and initiated penalty proceedings under 271 (1) (c) of the Act. On Assessee's appeal, the CIT(A) upheld the decision of the AO and also upheld the penalty. On further appeal, the Tribunal also upheld the decision of the CIT(A).

After hearing the parties , the High Court held that,

++ the assessee had admittedly made a claim in its return of income which was prohibited under the Act. The claim for deduction u/s 54 of the Act could only be made by individuals or HUF, while the assessee was admittedly a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956. Thus this was not a case, where a claim made was debatable or claim being made in the absence of any prohibition to make such a claim under the Act. In such cases, one could possibly infer that the claim was made under the bona fide interpretation of the law. In the present facts, this was admittedly not so. In the present facts, the assessee had furnished inaccurate particulars of income by claiming a deduction which was prohibited in case of assessee.

(See 2018-TIOL-45-HC-MUM-IT)


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

TIOL Tube Latest

TIOL Tube
Shri N K Singh, recipient of TIOL FISCAL HERITAGE AWARD 2023, delivering his acceptance speech at Fiscal Awards event held on April 6, 2024 at Taj Mahal Hotel, New Delhi.

TOP NEWS

AR not Afar by SK Rahman

VISION 360



Shri Ram Nath Kovind, Hon'ble 14th President of India, addressing the gathering at TIOL Special Awards event.

TII LATEST

TIOLCORPLAWS LATEST