IT : Where survey did not result in recovery of any specific amount and figures were arrived at by way of presumptive computation, there being no intention to evade tax, no penalty was to be levied under section 271(1)(c)
■■■
[2015] 53 taxmann.com 226 (Andhra Pradesh)
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
M.A. Quddus
v.
Income-tax Officer*
L. NARASIMHA REDDY AND CHALLA KODANDA RAM, JJ.
I.T.T.A. NO. 92 OF 2003†
SEPTEMBER 3, 2014
Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Penalty - For concealment of income (Surrender of income) - Assessment years 1986-87 and 1987-88 - Assessee was running a small private school - During survey operation, it was opined that certain amounts were not accounted for by assessee - However, survey did not result in recovery of any specific amount as such and figures were arrived at by taking into account number of students and prescribed fee even without noticing that in several cases, there would be default in payment of fee and social obligation of management of school to poor students and other important persons - It was not even alleged that assessee had any intention to evade tax or to defraud revenue - Whether, there was no justification to levy penalty under section 271(1)(c) on assessees - Held, yes [Para 6] [In favour of assessee]
P.C. Yadav for the Appellant. S.R. Ashok for the Respondent.
■■■
[2015] 53 taxmann.com 226 (Andhra Pradesh)
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
M.A. Quddus
v.
Income-tax Officer*
L. NARASIMHA REDDY AND CHALLA KODANDA RAM, JJ.
I.T.T.A. NO. 92 OF 2003†
SEPTEMBER 3, 2014
Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Penalty - For concealment of income (Surrender of income) - Assessment years 1986-87 and 1987-88 - Assessee was running a small private school - During survey operation, it was opined that certain amounts were not accounted for by assessee - However, survey did not result in recovery of any specific amount as such and figures were arrived at by taking into account number of students and prescribed fee even without noticing that in several cases, there would be default in payment of fee and social obligation of management of school to poor students and other important persons - It was not even alleged that assessee had any intention to evade tax or to defraud revenue - Whether, there was no justification to levy penalty under section 271(1)(c) on assessees - Held, yes [Para 6] [In favour of assessee]
P.C. Yadav for the Appellant. S.R. Ashok for the Respondent.
No comments:
Post a Comment