A legal contention raised bonafide by the assessee claiming the amounts to be capital receipt, only because the same was not accepted, by itself cannot be said to be act of fraud or gross or wilful negligence. Merely because the claim was rejected, the same cannot be branded as concealment. Before proceeding to the explanation below Section 271 and putting the responsibility on the assessee, it is necessary for the AO to first demonstrate that the explanation of the assessee or the conduct of the assessee was not reasonable on human probabilities, or that it was in the nature of violating settled legal positions. It cannot be said that, the explanations given by the assessee were fanciful, baseless or unacceptable.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
A legal contention raised bonafide by the assessee claiming the amounts to be capital receipt, only because the same was not accepted, by itself cannot be said to be act of fraud or gross or wilful negligence. Merely because the …<\/p>\n