Friday, 7 September 2012

S. 18(1)(c) of W. T. Act requires "clear cut" finding of concealment. If AO has not invoked Explanation 4 to s. 18(1)(c), CIT(A) cannot do so


Penalty proceedings are quasi criminal in nature and the Revenue must be put to strict compliance of the legal requirements. The AO erred in imposing penalty without clear findings as to whether there was concealment of particulars of any assets or providing of inaccurate particulars of any assets. The CIT(A) was wrong in invoking Explanation(4) to s. 18(1)(c) which provides that if the net wealth returned is was less than 70% of the assessed wealth, there is a presumption of concealment. As the AO had not invoked the Explanation, the CIT(A) could not have relied on it to confirm the penalty

 Ramanbhai B. Patel (HUF) vs. DCIT (Gujarat High Court)

No comments:

Delhi HC holds 10% pre-deposit requirement for penalty-only appeals inapplicable where SCN was issued before amendment

  This Tax Alert summarizes a recent ruling of the Delhi High Court (HC) [1] on whether the newly introduced pre-deposit requirement for fi...