| |
| The Tax Publishers2019 TaxPub(DT) 8148 (Jp-Trib) INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 271(1)(c)
Since assessee had not filed a single piece of evidence which can be verified independently and from independent source and had not produced any tangible material which could be verified independently and free from any manipulation, the same would not constitute a reasonable and bona fide explanation in terms of section 273B, therefore penalty was warranted.
|
Penalty under section 271(1)(c) - Validity - False claim of exemption under section 10(38) towards long-term capital gain (LTCG) on sale of shares -
Assessee received income as profit share and interest from the partnership firm. Assessment was completed by AO under section 143(3) whereby he made addition on account of long term capital gain. AO thereafter initiated the proceedings under section 271(1)(c) and levied penalty being 100% of tax sought to be evaded in respect of the long-term capital gain. CIT(A) upheld the penalty. Held: Assessee had not filed a single piece of evidence which can be verified independently and from independent source. There was no dematerialization of shares and even the return of income was filed only after the alleged transaction of sale of shares. Hence assessee had not produced any tangible material which could be verified independently and free from any manipulation, the same would not constitute a reasonable and bonafide explanation in terms of section 273B. Therefore, penalty was warranted.
REFERRED : CIT v. Reliance Petro-products Pvt. Ltd. (2010) 322 ITR 158 (SC) : 2010 TaxPub(DT) 1683 (SC) CIT v. Hiralal Doshi (2016) 383 ITR 19 (Bom.)
FAVOUR : Against the assessee
A.Y. : 2014-15
IN THE ITAT, JAIPUR BENCH
 SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT
|