×Latest Case Laws on Income Tax by various Income Tax Appellate Tribunals in India
These are the latest case laws decided by various Income Tax Appellate Tribunals (ITAT) of India on Income Tax which have been published recently. The case laws are open for discussion and we invite expert comments from our members on its applicability and effect on relevant issues.
These appeals filed by the separate Assessees are directed against the respective Orders of the Ld. CIT(A)-12, New Delhi relevant to assessment year 2014-15. Since the issues involved in these appeals are common and identical, hence, the appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience, by dealing with ITA No. 7091/Del/2018 (AY 2014-15) – Jagdish Prasad Avdesh KumarHUF and by only reproducing the grounds of this appeal.
1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) erred in sustaining the penalty order passed by the AO u/s. 271(1)(c) as in assessment order passed dated 26.12.2016 same is delightfully vague as to requisite satisfaction of AO to validly initiate penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1B) of the Act and said assessment order also does not disclose under which specific limb penalty charge is made by the AO, accordingly penalty order passed by AO and order of Ld. CIT(A) may please be quashed;
2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) erred in sustaining the penalty order passed by AO u/s. 271(1)(c) as AO has levied penalty without any application of mind in routine and casual manner which is confirmed in arbitrary manner by Ld. CIT(A), accordingly penalty order passed by AO and order of Ld. CIT(A) may please be quashed; Merits of penalty order u/s 271(l)(c) Rs 433,132
3. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Ld CIT-A erred in sustaining the penalty order passed by Ld AO u/s 27l(l)(c) without appreciating assessee ’s contention that:
i) Firstly addition made by Ld AO in quantum proceedings u/s 68 of the Act is itself incorrect and made in grave violation to principle of natural justice as no case specific incriminating material is brought on records at any stage so as to draw adverse inference u/s 68 in wake of inundated documentary evidence which have remained totally uncontroverted and simply on basis of innocuous surrender from assessee, addition u/s 68 was made, which can never give rise to valid penalty u/s 271(l)(c) of the Act;
ii) Secondly there is no animus and conscious concealment (intentional wrong doing) on part of assessee as evident from fact that assessee has given bonafide explanation in support of exemption claimed u/s 10(38) on staled LTCG which is based on valid documentary evidence ,so penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) is patently wrong;
iii) Thirdly bonafide conduct of assessee has been above board in extant case as no material fact is ever suppressed/hided or wrongly mentioned in return filed/assessment proceedings, so as to attract lethal consequences of section 271 (1) (c) of the Act;
iv) Fourthly, on merits of the claim no where it is objected by Ld AO/CIT-A that extant claim u/s 10(38) of the Act is already decided in favor of assessee by various higher court rulings so penalty u/s 271(l)(c) cannot be levied when addition itself is seriously questionable;