Hamirpur District Cooperative Bank Ltd. v. CIT

Case Laws Analysis
REFERRED Hamirpur District Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT 2019 TaxPub(DT) 1753 (All-HC)

SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT

The Tax Publishers2020 TaxPub(DT) 0945 (SC) : (2020) 269 TAXMAN 0201

INCOME TAX ACT, 1961

Section 261 Section 271(1)(c)

Where the assessee preferred SLP to appeal against the judgment of Allahabad High Court in Hamirpur District Cooperative Bank Ltd. v. CIT & Anr. [ITA No. 820 of 2012, dt. 21-2-2019] : (2019) 415 ITR 184 (All) : 2019 TaxPub(DT) 1753 (All-HC), whereby the High Court held that the Tribunal or the appellate authority committed no error or illegality in not accepting the plea of the assessee that the mistake in filing its return was bona fide and because of the amendment in the Finance Act, 2006 excluding the assessee from the purview of section 80-O that it was not a case where the assessee had claimed deductions under any head which had been disallowed by the revenue but was a case where the assessee had concealed its total taxable income and furnished inaccurate details in its return, therefore, the appellant/assessee was not able to establish his bona fides regarding the inaccurate particulars furnished in his return, the Supreme Court finding no grounds to interfere with the judgment and order impugned, dismissed the SLP.

Appeal (Supreme Court) - Special leave petition - Penalty under section 271(1)(c) - Validity--Deduction under section 80B claimed in return--Assessee was excluded from claiming deduction w.e.f. 1-4-2007--No bona fide mistake

Assessee preferred SLP to appeal against the judgment of Allahabad High Court in Hamirpur District Cooperative Bank Ltd. v. CIT & Anr. [ITA No. 820 of 2012, dt. 21-2-2019] : (2019) 415 ITR 184 (All) : 2019 TaxPub(DT) 1753 (All-HC), whereby the High Court held that the Tribunal or the appellate authority committed no error or illegality in not accepting the plea of the assessee that the mistake in filing its return was bona fide and because of the amendment in the Finance Act, 2006 excluding the assessee from the purview of section 80-O that it was not a case where the assessee had claimed deductions under any head which had beden disallowed by the revenue but was a case where the assessee had concealed its total taxable income and furnished inaccurate details in its return, therefore, the appellant/assessee was not able to establish his bona fides regarding the inaccurate particulars furnished in his return. Held: The Supreme Court finding no grounds to interfere with the judgment and order impugned, dismissed the SLP.