INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,MUMBAI - A BENCH
Before S/Sh. I P Bansal,Judicial Member & Rajendra,Accountant Member
/.ITA No.6210/Mum/2010, /Assessment Year-2005-06
Prakash G. Kewalramani The ACIT-19(1)
301, Deja Vu Apts. Mumbai.
77, Hill Road
PAN:AAGPK 4702 PAN:AAGPK 4702 K
( /Appellant) ( / Respondent)
/Assessee by :Shri Gopal P. Naik
/ Revenue by :Shri Premanand J.
/ Date of Hearing :28 - 04 -2015
/ Date of Pronouncement : 28 -04-2015
, 1961 254(1)
Order u/s.254(1)of the Inco me-tax Act,1961(Act)
PER RAJENDRA, AM:
Challenging the order dt.18/05/2010 of the CIT(A)-30- Mumbai, the assesseee has raised
following Grounds of Appeal:
I) The learned A.O has erred in levying penalty u/s.271 (1 )© and the honorable CIT-
A 30 erred in dismissing the appeal on the following grounds.
a) Both of them failed to appreciate the fact that the amount of Rs.18,10,000/
showed less was earned by Impact Management Services owned by the spouse of the appellant
b } The sai d am ount wa s deduct ed from gr oss pr ofe ssi onal rec ei pt a nd cr ed ite d
t o the sp ouse account in the hooks of appellant
c)The appellant readily agreed to include this amount to his total income
a s t h e s p o u s e assessment had been completed without considering this amount as
suggested by the A.O during the assessment proceedings.
The appellant reserves its right to add,delete,modify the grounds of the appeal
preferred as above.
Assessee,an individual and proprietor of M/s.Impact Management & Personnel Services,is
engaged in the business of manpower recruitment and management consultancy.He filed his
return of income on 30.10.2005,declaring total income of Rs.19,62,805/- .The Assessing Officer
(AO) completed the assessment u/s.143(3) of the Act on 31/12/2007,determining the income of
the assessee at Rs.38,73,345/-.
2.Effective ground of appeal is about the imposition of penalty u/s.271 (1)(c) of the Act,
amounting to Rs.6,09,250/-.During the assessment proceedings,the AO found that the assessee
6210/M/10 Prakash GK
So long as the assessee has not concealed any material fact or the factual information given by
him has not been found to be incorrect, he will not be liable to imposition of penalty under
section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, even if the claim made by him is unsustainable in
law, provided that he either substantiates the explanation offered by him or the explanation, even
if not substantiated, is found to be bona fide. If the explanation is neither substantiated nor shown
to be bona fide, Explanation 1 to section 271(1)(c) would come into play and the assessee will be
liable for the prescribed penalty".
In our opinion the explanation offered by the assessee in the matter under appeal is neither
bonafide nor substantiated and therefore the effective ground of appeal has to be decided against
As a result,appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 28th,April,2015.
( /I P Bansal) ( / RAJENDRA)
/ JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
/Mumbai, /Date: 28.04.2015
6210/M/10 Prakash GK
/Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1.Appellant / 2. Respondent /
3.The concerned CIT(A)/ , 4.The concerned CIT /
5.DR "A" Bench, ITAT, Mumbai / , ,.. .
/ BY ORDER,
/ Dy./Asst. Registrar
, /ITAT, Mumbai.