Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 24.08.2018 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Ludhiana [hereinafter referred to as CIT(A)] agitating the action of the CIT(A) in confirming the penalty of Rs. 7,46,000/- levied by the Assessing Officer u/s 271 (1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act').

3. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee, at the outset, has submitted that under the similar facts and circumstances, the Coordinate Bench of ITA No. 1403-chd-2018 Smt. Parkash Kaur, Ludhiana the Tribunal, in the case of 'Gajjan Singh Thind vs ACIT, ITA No. 1402/Chd/2018, decided the issue vide order dated 1.7.2019 has held that the provisions of section 271 (1)(c) being penal in nature and required to be strictly construed. The Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal has observed that if the income declared in the revised return which is valid and filed within the limitation period prescribed for filing the same, the penalty in respect of such declared income under the provisions of section 271 (1)(c) of the Act is not leviable. The Ld. counsel for the assessee has submitted that the assessee is related to 'Shri Gajjan singh Thind' and the facts and circumstances and even the dates of events, such as, date of filing of return of income, issuances of notice, filing of the revised return of income etc., are exactly identical except the quantum of income declared and the penalty imposed. The Ld. counsel for the assessee has submitted a chart showing the sequence of events, which is reproduced as under:-

4. The Ld. counsel has submitted that the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of 'Gajjan Singh Thind vs ACIT,' (supra) on similar facts and circumstances has ordered for the deletion of the penalty in respect of the income declared through validly filed revised return, however, the penalty @ 100% of the tax amount sought to be evaded has been confirmed in respect of the difference of the amount between the income shown in the revised return and the amount actually received in the bank account of the assessee. The said difference in the case of the assessee is of the amount of Rs. 40,015/-.

7. The Ld. DR, on the other hand, has submitted that since the revised return was filed by the assessee after the assessee was summoned by the Investigation Wing and even after the issuance of earlier notice u/s 143(2) of the Act on 18.9.2015, hence the assessee declared the af oresaid income when he was show caused. That it was clear-cut case of concealment of income and f urnishing of inaccurate particulars of income.

8. We have considered the rival contentions and have also minutely perused the relevant provisions of t h e A c t . I n t h e c a s e i n h a n d, t h o u g h t h e a s s e s s e e h a d filed the revised return after an enquiry was initiated by the Investigation Wing of the Income Tax Department about the Long Term Capital Gains declared by the assessee, yet, the revised return filed by the assessee was within the stipulated period prescribed under the Act. As per the provisions of section 139(5) of the Act, there is no bar to file a revised income even during assessment proceedings but ITA No. 1403-chd-2018 Smt. Parkash Kaur, Ludhiana before completion of the assessment subject to the condition that the period prescribed for filing the same has not expired. Under these circumstances, the revised return filed by an assessee will be a valid return. The A.O. under such circumstances neither can, nor is supposed to make further addition into the income of the assessee in respect of income which has a l r e a d y b e e n d e c l a r e d b y t h e a s s e s s e e i n t h e v a l i dl y filed revised return. If there is no addition made to t he income of the assessee, there will not be any tax sought to be evaded by an assessee. If there is no tax sought to be evaded, no penalty can be computed or levied under the provisions of section 271(1)(c) of the Act. The reliance in this respect can be placed on the decision of the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ' CIT Vs. K ul w a n t S i n gh ' (2019) 104 Taxmann.com 340 (Chandigarh - Trib.), wherein the following observations have been made by the Coordinate Chandigarh Bench of the Tribunal:

9. The provisions of section 271(1)(c) of the Act are penal in nature and they are required to be strictly construed. These cannot be extended by way of liberal interpretation to include the cases, which otherwise, do not fall within the purview and scope of the provisions of section 271(1)(c) of the Act. In view of this, since the income of Rs.41,55,876/- has already been declared in the revised return, which was valid and filed within the limitation period prescribed for filing the same, hence, in view of our discussion made above, the penalty in respect of the aforesaid income declared is not leviable and the same is accordingly ordered to be deleted.