| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2008 SLG 3887 2008 SLD 3887 (2008) 300 ITR 40 |
ITT APPEAL No. 230 OF 2005 DECEMBER 6, 2007
SMT. T. MEENA KUMARI AND MS. G. ROHINI, JJ.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
V.V. Projects & Investments P. Ltd.
v.
Deputy Commissioner of IncomE tax, Central Circle 3(1), Hyderabad
Law:
Section:
Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Penalty - For concealment of income - Assessment year 1995-96 - Whether finding on issue whether assessee has concealed his income or has deliberately furnished inaccurate particulars thereof is essentially a finding of fact which has to be spelt out by way of recording satisfaction of Assessing Officer as required under section 271(1) and in absence of such a finding in assessment order, no penalty proceeding can be initiated - Held, yes - Assessee-company, engaged in business of running a hotel, claimed in its return depreciation on solar equipment acquired by it - Subsequently, assessee filed its revised return giving up its claim for depreciation as company, which supplied solar equipment, expressed its inability to produce evidence for equipment supplied - Assessing Officer passed assessment order accepting revised return but levied penalty under section 271(1)(c) - Whether since assessment was completed accepting income as per revised return of income and assessment order as well as show-cause notice did not reflect any satisfaction of Assessing Officer as required under section 271(1)(c), penalty levied upon assessee was to be set aside - Held, yes FACTS The assessee-company, engaged in the business of running a hotel, filed its return of income for the relevant assessment year claiming 50 per cent depreciation on the solar equipment acquired by it for its hotel project. Subsequently, the assessee filed revised return giving up its claim for depreciation as the company, which supplied the solar equipment, did not properly maintain its records and books and expressed its inability to produce evidence for the equipment supplied. The Assessing Officer passed assessment order accepting the revised return but imposed penalty under section 271(1)(c) rejecting the contention of the assessee that it was a voluntary declaration. On appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the order of the Assessing Officer. On second appeal, the Tribunal also upheld the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) on the issue of levy of penalty. On further appeal : HELD It is clear from section 271(1) that the Assessing Officer, in the…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492