News Update

Unveil One Nation; One Debt Code; One Compliance Rule for Centre & StatesChina moves WTO against US tax subsidies for EVs & renewable energyMore on non-doms - The UK Spring Budget 2024 (See TII Edit)Notorious history-sheeter Mukhtar Ansari succumbs to cardiac arrest in UP jailTraining Program for Cambodian civil servants commences at MussoorieNY imposes USD 15 congestion taxCBIC revises tariff value of edible oils, gold & silver45 killed as bus races into ravine in South AfricaCBIC directs all Customs offices to remain open on Saturday & SundayBankman-Fried jailed for 25 yrs in FTX scamI-T- Once the citizen deposits the tax upon coming to know of his liability, it cannot be said that he has deliberately or willfully evaded the depositing of tax and interest in terms of Section 234A can be waived: HCHouthis attack continues in Red Sea; US military shoots down 4 dronesI-T- Secured creditor has priority charge over secured asset, over claims of I-T Department & other Departments; any excess amount recovered by Secured Creditor from auction of secured asset, over & above the dues payable to it, are to be remitted to the Departments: HCFederal Govt hands out USD 60 mn to rebuild collapsed bridge in BaltimoreI-T - Receipts of sale of scrap being part & parcel of activity and being proximate thereto would also be within ambit of gains derived from industrial undertaking for purpose of computing deduction u/s 80-IB: HCCanadian School Boards sue social media titans for 4 bn Canadian dollar in damagesI-T - Once assssee on year of reversal has paid taxes on excess provision and similar feature appeared in earlier years and assesee had payments for liquidated damages on delay of deliverables, no adverse inference can be drawn: HCFormer IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt jailed for 20 yrs for planting drugs to frame lawyerST - Software development service & IT-enabled service provided by assessee was exempt from tax during relevant period, by virtue of CBEC's Notification & Circular; demands raised for such period not sustainable: CESTATUN says Households waste across world is now at least one billion meals a dayCus - Order rejecting exporter's request for conversion of Shipping Bills on grounds that the same has been made by exporter beyond period of three months from date of Let Export Order in terms of CBEC Circular No. 36/2010-Cus : CESTATIndia, China hold fresh dialogue for complete disengagement on Western borders: MEACus - No Cess is payable when Basic Customs Duty is found to be Nil: CESTATThakur says India is prepared for 2036 OlympicsCX - As per settled law, a right acquired as result of a statutory provision, cannot be taken away retrospectively unless said statutory provision so provides or by necessary implication has such effect: CESTAT
 
I-T - Mere projection of profit statement found in loose sheets from taxpayer's premises, is no basis for levying penalty in his hands: ITAT

By TIOL News Service

VIZAG, APRIL 20, 2018: THE ISSUE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL IS - Whether loose sheets found during course of search which shows only projection of profit statement, is no basis to conclude undisclosed income and levy penalty u/s 271AAB, when no investigation was carried out to link cost of profit to the entries in books of account. YES IS THE ANSWER.

Facts of the case:

During the relevant year, a search was carried out in the assessee’s case, wherein it had admitted the additional income of Rs.4.80 crores as additional sales for the financial year 2012-13 onwards and the additional income admitted for the assessment year 2013-14 was Rs.1,48,84,142/-. Accordingly, the assessee filed the return and the assessment was completed making the disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) for an amount of Rs.3,35,000/-. In addition, the AO issued show cause notice as to why penalty should not be levied u/s 271AAB. In reply, the assessee submitted that it had filed return on the basis of turnover and the books of accounts were regularly maintained. The said turnover was disclosed in the profit & loss account and included the sum of Rs.1,48,84,142/- towards additional sale price offered sold/booked for sale on the date of search. The assessee submitted before the AO that no incriminating material was found suggesting receipt of any additional sale price by the firm. The admission of additional income was only to buy peace and to avoid protracted litigation as stated by the assessee. Not being convinced with the explanation offered by assessee, the AO imposed penalty @ 30% of the undisclosed income amounted to Rs.44,65,543/-. On appeal, the FAA scaled down the penalty to 10% instead of the penalty levied by the AO at 30%.

Tribunal held that,

++ the legislature has included the provisions of section 274 and section 275 in 271AAB of the Act with clear intention to consider the imposition of penalty judicially. Section 274 deals with the procedure for levy of penalty, wherein, it directs that no order imposing penalty shall be made unless the assessee has been heard or has been given a reasonable opportunity of being heard. Once the opportunity is given to the assessee, the penalty cannot be mandatory and it is on the basis of the facts and merits placed before the AO. This opportunity of being heard is not a mere formality but it is to adhere to the principles of natural justice. In the present case, a search u/s 132 was carried out in the assessee’s premises but no evidence was found during the course of search except a loose sheet. Careful verification of the loose sheet found during the course of search shows the projections and profitability but not the actual expenditure incurred by the assessee. Penalty u/s 271AAB attracts on undisclosed income but not on admission made by the assessee u/s 132(4). The AO must establish that there is undisclosed income on the basis of incriminating material. In the instant case, a loose sheet was found according to the AO, it was incriminating material evidencing the undisclosed income. However neither the AO nor CIT(A) has verified the cost of construction with the books and projections found at the time of search. There was no money, bullion, jewellery or valuable article or thing or entry in the books of accounts or documents transactions were found during the course of search indicating the assets not recorded in the books of accounts or other documents maintained in the normal course, wholly or partly;

++ the Revenue did not find any undisclosed asset, any other undisclosed income or the inflation of expenditure during the search/ assessment proceedings. Though a loose sheet was found that does not indicate any suppression of income but it is only projection of profit statement. The amount of Rs.3571/- mentioned in the projections refers to cost and profit which is approximate sale price but not the cost as stated by the AO in the penalty order. The cost of construction in the projections projected at Rs.2177/- which is in synch with the statement given by the assessee. The AO was happy with the disclosure given by the assessee and did not verify the factual position with the books of accounts and projections and bring the evidence to unearth the undisclosed income. Neither the AO nor the investigation wing linked the cost of profit or cost of asset to the entries in the books of accounts or to the sales conducted by the assessee to the sale deeds. The facts of the assessee’s case shows that there was no undisclosed income found during the course of search and no incriminating material was found, hence there is no case for imposing penalty u/s 271AAB of the Act.

(See 2018-TIOL-580-ITAT-VIZAG)


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

AR not Afar by SK Rahman

TIOL Tube Latest

Shri Shailendra Kumar, Trustee, TIOL Trust, giving welcome speech at TIOL Awards 2023




Shri M C Joshi, Former Chairman, CBDT




Address by Shri Buggana Rajendranath, Hon'ble Finance Minister of Andhra Pradesh at TIOL Awards 2023