GAUTAM RASIKLAL ASHRA, MUMBAI V. DCIT CC 40, MUMBAI

ITA 932/MUM/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8079 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 10 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-12-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 17-07-2017
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 10-02-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: AGAINST DATED PASSED
• Keywords: Deemed to accrue or arise in india; Wrong claim; Difference of opinion; Revised return
• Section: 143(3); 153A; 147

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL G BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN , AM AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH , JM / I .T.A. NO. 932 / M/ 20 1 5 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2005 - 06 ) GAUTAM RASIKLAL ASHRA 40 GROUND FLOOR, HASIM BLDG. VEER NARIMAN RD FORT.MUMBAI PIN:400001 / VS. DCIT CC 40 653, 6 TH FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M.K. RD MUMBAI - 400020 ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. : AABPA 0457 E ( / APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) / DATE OF HEARING : 18.09 .2017 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 15.12. 2017 / O R D E R PER AMARJIT SINGH, JM: THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 10.10 .201 4 PASSED BY THE COMMIS S IONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 38 , MUMBAI [HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE CIT(A)] RELEVANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 5 - 06 IN WHICH THE PENALTY LEVIED BY THE AO U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT HAS BEEN CONF IRMED. 1 . THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: - 1. THE LEARNED CIT (A) - 38 ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE W. DOT - CENTRAL CIRCLE 40, IN UPHOLDING THE LEVY OF PENALTY U/S 271(L)(C} OF THE III 1961'BY HOLDING THAT THE CLAIM OF SET - OFF BROUGHT FORWARD LOSSES AGGREGATING RS,30,34,901 (COMPRISED OF ASSESSEE BY: SHRI RAHUL K HAKANI DEPARTMENT BY: SHRI V. VIDHYADHER ITA. NO.932/M/2015 A.Y.2005 - 06 2 SHORT TERM CAPITAL LOSS OF RS. 28,66,992/ - EARNED TILL 30.09,2004 AND LONG TERM CAPITAL LOSS OF RS. 1,68,216/ - ) OF AY 2002 - 03 THAT WAS BASED ON COMPLETED ASSESSMENT U/S 143 (3) READ WITH SECTION 147 OF INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 AND IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY INDISCRIMINATING MATERIALS FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH AND DISREGARDING THE FACT THAT THE APPELLANT HAD FILED REVISED COMPUTATION OF INCOME AND HAD PAID TAXES ALONG WITH INTEREST, DUE TO INADVERT ENT ERROR THAT OCCURRED AND ERROR WAS RECTIFIED DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT ON ITS OWN INITIATIVE AND THEREFORE THE PENALTY LEVIED U/S 271(L)(C) OF THE IT ACT, 1961 OF RS. 9,92,031L ON THE GROUND THAT THE APPELLANT HAD FURNISHED INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME WHICH LED TO EVASION OF INCOME TAX BE DELETED. 2. THE LEARNED CIT (A) - 39 ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE W. DOT - CENTRAL CIRCLE 40, IN UPHOLDING THE LEVY OF PENALTY U/S 271(L)(C} OF THE IT ACT, 1961 BY HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE'S INADVERTENT ERROR AS AN ATTEMPT TO EVADE PAYMENT OF TAX AT CORRECT RATES IN CLAIMING INCOME FROM KOTAK LIQUID GROWTH FUND OF RS. 118,757/ - EARNED AFTER 01.102004 AS SHORT TERM CAPITAL PIN LIABLE TO TAX @ 10% U/S 111A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 INSTEAD AS SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN TAXABLE @ 30% THAT WAS BASED ON COMPLETED ASSESSMENT U/S 143 (3) READ WITH SECTION 147 OF INCOME TAX ACT, 196' AND IN THE ABSENCE, OF ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIALS FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH DISREGARDING THE FACT THAT THE APPEL LANT HAD FILED THE REVISED COMPUTATION OF INCOME AND PAID TAXES ALONG WITH INTEREST BY ACCEPTING INADVERTENT ERROR ON OWN INITIATIVE AND THEREFORE THE PENALTY LEVIED U 5 271(L)(C) OF THE IT ACT, 1961 OF RS. 3881 8/ - BE DELETED. 3. THE LEARNED CIT A) - 38 ERRE D I N CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE LD. DCIT - CENTRAL CIRCLE 40, IN UPHOLDING THE LEVY OF PENALTY U/S 271(L)(C) OF THE IT ACT, 1961 BY HOLDING THAT NOTIONAL INC OME U/S 23{4)(B) OF THE INCOME T AX ACT) 1961 OF RS. 156,557/ - FOR FLAT AT SURE AT RS. 97,217/ - 8% OF COST OF RS. 12,15,200/ - ) AND T WO FLATS AT ANSEL VIHAR BORIVALI AT RS, 59,340/ - (8% OF COST OF RS. 742,376/ - ), WHICH WERE NOT RENTED AND HAD REMAINED VACANT THROUGHOUT THE YEAR AND THEREFORE, NO INCOME WAS EARNED THROUGH THESE PROPERTIES AND HENCE THERE WAS NO CONCEALMENT OF INCOME OR FURNISHING INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME INVITING PROVISIONS OF SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE IT ACT 1961 BASED ON DEEMED INCOME AND HENCE, PENALTY OF RS, 51,174/ LEVIED U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE IT ACT 1961 BE DELETED. ITA. NO.932/M/2015 A.Y.2005 - 06 3 4. THE LEAR NED CIT (A) - 33 ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE LD. DCIT - CENTRAL CIRCLE 40, IN UPHOLDING THE LEVY OF PENALTY U/S 271(L)(C) OF THE IT ACT, 1961 IN REJECTING THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE OF HIS RELIANCE ON ASSESSED INCOME, COMPUTED VIDE ORDER DATED 3004. 2008 U/S 143 (3) READ WITH SECTION 147 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIALS FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005 - 06 AND ASSESSEES CLAIM AS NOT BONAFIDE AND REJECTING THE SAME AS FALSE DA M, AND THEREBY LEVYING PENALTY OF RS, 100,0001 - U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 IN RESPECT OF ADDITIONS MADE WHILE COMPLETING ASSESSMENT U/S 143 ( 3) READ WITH SECTION 153A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 5. YOUR APPELLANT PRAYS FOR THE LEAVE TO ADD, AMEND, ALTER, DELETE OR MODIFY THE GROUNDS OF THE APPEAL. 2 . THE BRI EF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE FILED HIS ORIGINAL RETURN OF INCOME ON 30 - 08 - 2005 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME TO THE TUNE OF RS.2 , 05 , 52 , 000/ - . THE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY A ND THE ASSESSMENT U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT R.W.S. 147 OF THE ACT WAS COMPLETED ON 30.04.2008 DETERMINING THE TOTAL INCOME TO THE TUNE OF RS.2,20,31,830/ - . A SEARCH & SEIZURE ACTION U/S 132(1) OF THE ACT, 1961 WAS CONDUCTED AT THE OFFICE AND RESIDENTIAL PREMISES OF BLISS GVS PHARMACEUTICAL GROUP ON 16.11.2010 BY DDIT (INV.) UNIT NO. VIII(2), MUMBAI. THE ASSESSEE WAS ONE OF THE MEMBER OF THE SAID GROUP , THEREFORE, THE RESIDENTIAL PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE WAS ALSO COVERED UNDER SEARCH & SEIZURE. NOTICE U/S 153A OF THE ACT WAS ISSUED ON 28.05.2012 WHICH WAS SERVED. THEREAFTER, IN PURSUANCE OF NOTICE, THE ASSESSEE FILED THE RETURN OF INCOME ON 28.06.2012 DECLARING INCOME TO THE TUNE OF RS.2,20,43,830/ - . ON VERIFICATION OF RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE A.Y. 2002 - 03. THE ASSESSEE FILED THE RETURN OF INCOME ITA. NO.932/M/2015 A.Y.2005 - 06 4 FOR THE A.Y. 200 2 - 03 ON 27.11.2002 WHICH WAS AFTER DUE DATE AS PER PROVISION SECTION 139(1) OF THE I.T. ACT THE ASSESSEE HAS TO FURNISHED RETURN OF LOSS WITHIN THE TIME ALLOWED U/S 139(1) TO CLAIM LOSS OR PART THE REOF TO BE CARRY FORWARD TO SET - OFF. SINCE THE ASSESSEE FILED THE RETURN FOR THE A.Y. 2002 - 03 AFTER DUE DATE THE CAPITAL LOSS INCURRED IN A.Y. 2002 - 03 COULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO SET - OFF AGAINST CAPITAL GAIN FOR SUBSEQUENT YEAR. THE ASSESSMENT U/S 143( 3) R.W.S . 153A OF THE ACT, 1961 WAS COMPLETED ON 30.03 .20 13 BY RAISING THE DEMAND OF SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAI N OF RS.28,66,692/ - (TAXABLE @ 3 0%) AND LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN OF RS.1,68,216/ - (TAXABLE @ 20% ) FOR THE A.Y. 2005 - 06 WHICH WERE NOT ALLOWABLE. THE ASSESSEE EARNED THE PROFIT OF RS.1,18,757/ - ON DEBT ORIENTED UNITS AND OFFERED THE SAME FOR TAXATION UNDER THE SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN ON SALE OF SHARES AT THE RATE OF 10% UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 111A OF THE ACT. ON VERIFICATION THE CLAIM WAS NOT FOUND JUST IFIABLE AS THE SAME WAS TAXABLE @ 30% , HENCE, AN AMOUNT OF RS.1,18,757/ - WAS ADDED TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. FURTHER IT WAS NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN MORE THAN ONE PROPERTY AS SELF - OCCUPIED BUT DOES NOT OFFER THE INCOME OF THE OTHER PROPERTY UNDER THE DEEMING PROVISION U/S 23(B) OF THE ACT, 1961. THE ASSESSEE HAS EXERCISED THE OPTION OF TREATING THE HOUSE PROPERTY AS SELF - OCCUPIED IN RESPECT OF FLAT AT GAMDEVI, MUMBAI. THE DEEM ING PROVISION U/S 23(4)(B) OF THE ACT WAS APPLICABLE TO THE FLAT SITUATED AT PUNE AND THE ANNUAL VALUE OF THE PUNE PROPERTY WAS DETERMINED AS AT RS. 97,217/ - I.E., 8% OF RS.12,15,210/ - AND ADDED TO THE INCOME OF THE ITA. NO.932/M/2015 A.Y.2005 - 06 5 OF THE ASSESSEE . FURTHER, IT IS NOTICED T HAT THE ASSESSEE OWNED TWO SMALL FLATS AT ANSAL VIHAR COMPLEX, KASTURI PARK EXTENSION BUT NO INCOME WAS OFFERED , THEREFORE , ANNUAL RENT VALUE WAS ASSESSED TO THE TUNE OF RS.59,340/ - I.E., @ 8% OF THE COST AND ADDED TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. THE TOTAL ADDITION WAS MADE TO THE TUNE OF RS. 1,56,557/ - . THE NOTICE OF PENALTY WAS GIVEN AND THEREAFTER THE PENALTY TO THE TUNE OF RS. 11,00,000/ - WAS LEVIED BY VIRTUE OF ORDER DATED 23.09.2013 . THEREAFTER, THE ASSESSEE FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) WHO CONFIRM ED THE PENALTY , THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE PRESENT APPEAL BEFORE US. ISSUE NO.1 & 3 : - 3 . ALL THE ISSUES ARE IN CONNECTION WITH THE CONFIRMATION OF PENALTY BY THE CIT(A) LEVIED BY THE AO. WE HAVE HEARD THE ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE OF THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE RECORD. IN BRIEF, THE ASSESSING OFFICER LEVIED THE PENALTY ON AC COUNT OF THREE ADDITIONS IN WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAS SET - OFF CAPITAL GAIN OF RS . 30,34,904/ - WHICH INCLUDES SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN OF RS.28,66,992/ - EARNED TILL 30.09.2004 AND LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN OF RS.1,68,216/ - TAXABLE @ OF 30% AGAINST THE BROUGHT FORWARD LONG TERM CAPITAL LOSS FOR A.Y. 20 0 3 - 04. SINCE THE EARLIER RETURN WAS NOT FILED WELL IN TIME , THEREFORE, THE LONG /SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN WAS NOT SET - OFF AND THE ADDITION WAS RAISED TO THE TUNE OF RS. 30,34,908/ - . IT IS TO BE SEEN WHETHER THE SAID ADDITION RAISED PENALTY PROCEEDING U/S ITA. NO.932/M/2015 A.Y.2005 - 06 6 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT OR NOT. THE ASSESSEE CL AIMED THE SET - OFF ON BROUGHT FORWARD LOSS OF RS.30,34,908/ - AGAINST STCG OF RS. 28,66,992/ - AND LTCG OF RS.1,68,216/ - . T HE LOSS PERTAINS TO THE YEAR OF 2002 - 03 . THE LOSS WAS FURTHER CARRIED OUT TO THE A.Y. 2003 - 04 . T HE SAID SET - OFF WAS DISALLOWED ON THE BASIS OF THIS FACTS THAT THE RETURN WAS NOT FILED WE LL IN TIME HOWEVER, SUBSEQUENTLY REVISED RETURN WAS FILED IN WHICH THE SAID FACTS HAVE BEEN DISCLOSED. IT IS ARGUED THAT RAISING THE CLAIM OF SET - OFF BEFORE FILING TH E RETURN ON DUE DATE AND AFTER FILING THE RETURN AFTER THE DUE DATE IS THE DEBATABLE ISSUE, THEREFORE, NO PENALTY IS LEVIABLE IN VIEW OF THE LAW SETTLED IN PEERLESS GENERAL FINANCE & INVESTMENT CO. LTD VS. JT. CIT( 003) 85 ITD 215 (KOL)(TRIB) DATED 07.03.20 03, ITO VS. M/S. UMA DEVELOPERS IT. NO. 7718/M/2014 FOR THE A.Y. 2012 - 13 DATED 10.08.2016 MUMBAI TRIBUNAL AND CIT VS. ALOK ENTERPRISES (2004) 266 ITR 399 (SC). ON THE OTHER HAND THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE OF DEPARTMENT HAS REFUTED THE SAID CONTENTIONS. AFTER GIVING CAREFULLY THOUGHT ADVANCE LD. REPRESENTATIVE OF THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE RECORD CAREFULLY, WE NOTICED THAT THERE IS DIFFERENCE OF OPINION IN CONNECTION WITH RAISING THE CLAIM OF SET - OFF BY FILING THE RETURN EARLIER TO THE DUE DATE IN VIEW OF THE PROVISION U/S 139(1) AND AFTER THE DUE DATE IN VIEW OF PROVISION U/S 139(4) OF THE ACT IN THE CASE OF PEERLESS GENERAL FINANCE & INVESTMENT CO. LTD VS. JT. CIT(003) 85 ITD 215 (KOL)(TRIB) DATED 07.03.2003, THERE WAS A DIFFERENCE OF OPINION IN THE JUDICIAL AND ACCOUNTANT MEMBER . IN VIEW OF ACCOUNTANT MEMBER WAS IN FAVOUR OF ITA. NO.932/M/2015 A.Y.2005 - 06 7 REVENUE WHEREAS THE VIEW OF JUDICIAL MEMBER WAS IN FAVOUR OF ASSESSEE. THE MATTER WAS REFERRED TO THIRD MEMBER WHO SUPPORTED THE VIEW OF ACCOUNTANT MEMBER . THEREAFTER, THE MATTER CONTROVERSY CAME BEFOE THE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. ALOK ENTERPRISES (2004) 266 ITR 399 (SC) IN WHICH THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT REMANDED THE ISSUE BEFORE THE HONBLE HIGH COURT . IN THE SAID CIRCUMSTANCE S, WHEN THE RETURN OF LOSS FILED BEYOND PRESCRIBED TIME SO IN SUCH A SITUATION WHETHER THE ASSESSEE WAS ENTITLED TO CARRY FORWARD OF LOSSES FOR SET - OFF OR NOT IS A DEBATABLE QUESTION . WE FIND SUPPORT OF LAW SETTLED BY HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT VIDE ORDER DATED 08/07/2014 IN THE CASE OF CIT VS M/S NAYAN BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS (ITA NO.415/2012) WHEREIN IT WAS HELD THAT NO PENALTY IS IMPOSABLE U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT . NO DOUBT, IN THE SAID CIRCUMSTANCES THE PENALTY IS NOT LEVIABLE ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE OF BROUGHT FORWARD LOSS OF RS.30, 34,908/ - . 4 . THE OTHER GROUND TO LEVY PENALTY IS IN CONNECTION WITH THE INCOME EARNED ON DEBITED ORIENTED FUND TO THE TUNE OF RS.1,18,757/ - . THE ASSESSEE TREATED THE SAME AS SHARE AND ACCORDINGLY TAX @ OF 10% U/S 111A OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961. THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE DOES NOT FALL WITHIN THE AMBIT OF U/S 111A OF THE ACT , THEREFORE, THE TAX @ OF 30% WAS LEVIABLE. IT IS A CASE OF WRONG CLAIM AND NO PENALTY IS LEVIABLE IN VIEW OF THE LAW SETTLED IN RELIANCE PETRO PRODUCT 322 ITR 158 ITA. NO.932/M/2015 A.Y.2005 - 06 8 A CCORDINGLY, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT ON THIS ADDITION ALSO TO THE TUNE OF RS. 1,18,757/ - NO PENALTY IS LEVIABLE. 5 . NOW COMING TO THE THIRD GROUND TO LEVY THE PENALTY . THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE HAS ARGUED THAT THE IN THE SIMILAR CIRCUMSTANCES, THE CIT(A) HA S DELETED THE PENALTY IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THE A.Y. 2007 - 08, 2009 - 10 AND 2010 - 11. MOREOVER, THE ISSUE IS DEBATABLE, THEREFORE, NO PENALTY IS LEVIABLE. ON APPRAISAL OF THE ORDER OF AO AS WELL AS CIT(A) , WE NOTICE D THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS HAVING FOUR PROPERTIES I.E., ONE AT GAMDEVI, MUMBAI AND THE OTHER FLAT IN PUNE AND TWO SMALL FLATS AT ANSAL VIHAR COMPLEX, KASTURI PARK EXTENSION . O NE PROPERTY SITUATED AT GAMDEVI WAS IN HIS POSSESSION AND THE OTHER PROP ERTY WERE VACATED . NO INCOME WAS SHOWN. CIT(A ) HAS DELETED THE SAID ADDITION IN THE SUBSEQUENT ASSESSMENT YEARS OF 2007 - 08, 2009 - 10 AND 2010 - 11 ON THE BASIS OF THIS FACT THAT THIS ISSUE WAS DEBATABLE IN VIEW OF THE FINDING IN THE CASE OF WE NOTE THAT THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT VIDE ORDER DATED 08/07/2014 IN THE CASE OF CIT VS M/S NAYAN BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS (ITA NO.415/2012) HELD THAT NO PENALTY IS IMPOSABLE U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT. MOREOVER, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE PROPERTY HAS BEEN DISCLOSED BY THE ASSESSEE . T HE SAME WERE NOT FOUND TO BE OCCUPIED BY ANY PERSON . T HE ISSUE WAS DEBATABLE AND THE CIT(A) HAS ALREADY ACCEPTED THE CONTENTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE IN THE SUBSEQUENT YEAR, THEREFORE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE PENALTY IS NOT LIABLE TO BE ITA. NO.932/M/2015 A.Y.2005 - 06 9 SUSTAINABLE. SINCE, THE PENALTY LEVIED ON THE ABOVE MENTIONED 3 GROUND IS NOT A CONCEALMENT OF INCOME NOR FURNISHING INACCURATE PARTICULARS , THEREFORE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE FINDING OF THE CIT(A) IS WRONG AGAINST LAW AND FACTS AND IS NOT LIABLE TO JUSTIFIABLE , THEREFORE, WE SET ASIDE THE FINDING OF THE CIT(A) ON THIS I SSUE AND DELETE THE PENALTY. ADDITIONAL GROUND 6. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO RAISED THE AD DITIONAL GROUND THAT THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW BECAUSE THE ASS ESSING OFFICER NOWHERE SPECIFY THE PARTICULAR LIMB IN WHICH THE PENALTY IS LEVIABLE , THEREFORE, THE PENALTY IS LIABLE TO BE SET ASIDE IN VIEW OF THE LAW SETTLED CIT V/S SSAS EMERALD MEADOWS (016)242 TAXMAN 180(SC) AND CIT V/S SSAS EMERALD MEADOWS (2016) 73 TAXMAN.COM241(KER)(HC) AND CIT V/S SAMSON PERINCHERY ITA N.1154 OF 2014 DATED 05 - 01 - 2017BOMBAY HIGH COURT. ON APPRAISAL OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 30.03.2013 , WE FOUND THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER INITIATED TO LEVY THE PENALTY ON ACCOUNT OF FUR NISHING INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME WHEREAS THE NOTICED HAS BEEN TICKED OFF (PRINTED TICKED) ON THE GROUND OF CONCEALMENT OF PARTICULARS OF INCOME AND ON ACCOUNT OF FURNISHING INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME WHICH SHOWS NO APPLICATION OF MIND AND IS UNJUSTIFIABLE IN VIEW OF THE LAW SETTLED IN CASE CIT V/S SSAS EMERALD MEADOWS (016)242 TAXMAN 180(SC) AND CIT V/S SSAS ITA. NO.932/M/2015 A.Y.2005 - 06 10 EMERALD MEADOWS (2016) 73 TAXMAN.COM241(KER)(HC) AND CIT V/S SAMSON PERINCHERY ITA N.1154 OF 2014 DATED 05 - 01 - 2017BOMBAY HIGH COURT. AC CO R DINGLY, WE DELETE THE PENALTY. 7 . IN THE RESULT , THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS HEREBY ALLOWED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 15.12. 2017 SD/ - SD/ - ( B.R. BASKARAN ) (AMARJIT SINGH) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI; DATED : 15.12. 2 01 7 V.P. SINGH / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) - 4. / CIT 5. , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// / (DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI