| COURT: | ITAT Mumbai |
| CORAM: | D. Manmohan VP, Sanjay Arora (AM) |
| SECTION(S): | 10B, 271(1)(c) |
| GENRE: | Domestic Tax |
| CATCH WORDS: | concealment of income, furnishing inaccurate particulars of income, penalty |
| COUNSEL: | Yogesh Thar |
| DATE: | August 7, 2015 (Date of pronouncement) |
| DATE: | August 13, 2015 (Date of publication) |
| AY: | 1997-98, 1998-99, 1999-00 |
| FILE: | Click here to view full post with file download link |
| CITATION: | |
| S. 271(1)(c): Claim that interest income is eligible for s. 10B exemption, though upheld by the ITAT for an earlier year, is so implausible that it attracts penalty for concealment/ furnishing inaccurate particulars of income | |
We, in view of the foregoing, find no merit in the assessee’s case. It, to our mind, has not adduced any explanation, much less substantiated it, except for a bald assertion (i.e., of the said interest income as being a part of the assessee’s business income). The reliance on the decisions by the hon’ble jurisdictional high court, which we have found to be in fact supportive of the Revenue’s case, with the law in the matter being, in fact, well settled, is only a false plea or a ruse. Reliance on the decision by the tribunal for a subsequent year (AY 2000-01) is, under the circumstances, again, completely misplaced. A plausible explanation towards its’ claim/s saves penalty u/s. 271(1)(c), in view of, again, the settled law in the matter which though is completely missing in the present case
Recent Comments