ITAT upheld addition and penalty as there was no explanation by assessee
ITAT upheld addition and penalty as there was no explanation by assessee
Assessee filed his return of income. Case was selected for scrutiny assessment and notice u/s 143(2) (of Income Tax Act, 1961) was issued. AO learnt that assessee sold immovable property for Rs.30 lakhs, which it had not disclosed. Assessee also had interest income. AO made addition of LTCG and interest income, and imposed penalty. CIT(A) confirmed AO’s order. ITAT upheld CIT(A)’s order, as there was no explanation by assessee.-500758
1. Assessee filed his return of income declaring total income at Rs.1,77,824.
2. The case was selected for scrutiny assessment and a notice u/s 143(2) (of Income Tax Act, 1961) was issued.
3. AO got information that assessee has sold immovable property for Rs.30 lakhs, which it had not disclosed.
4. The assessee also had interest income.
5. AO made addition of Long Term Capital Gain and interest income.
6. AO imposed penalty u/s 271(1)(c) (of Income Tax Act, 1961).
7. CIT(A) confirmed AO’s order.
On appeal, the ITAT held as under:
8. There is no explanation at the end of the assessee as to how he failed to include Long Term Capital Gain in his computation of income.
9. It is also pertinent to mention that the Assessing Officer got information from the Annual Information Return Wing and only thereafter confronted the assessee.
10. The Assessing Officer did not get an idea or clue from the computation of income or annexure appended by the assessee with regard to the sale of property.
11. No interference is called for in the order of the CIT(A).
Case Reference - Rajnikant Gamanlal Gilitwala Vs. ITO
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "C" BENCH, AHMEDABAD
BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND
SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
ITA No. 2320/Ahd/2015
(Assessment Year: 2011-12)
×
