Income Tax

No Penalty for discrepancy in salary figure between Form No. 16 and 26AS

For discrepancy in salary figure between Form No. 16 and 26AS it cannot be said that the assessee has concealed amount or furnished inaccurate particulars of income – ITAT

ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
ABCAUS 2737 (2019) (01) ITAT

During scrutiny proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act), the Assessing Officer (AO) noticed that as per 26AS, the assessee, apart from salary had also received commission and also the salary amount as per form 26AS was more than the amount declared in the return.

Since there is no response from the assessee in respect of the discrepancy between Form 26AS and Form 16, AO completed the assessment u/s 144 of the Act bringing the entire receipts as per 26AS and initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act and levied penalty.

Aggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A), who upheld the AO’s decision and dismissed the appeal. Aggrieved, assessee filed the instant appeal before the Tribunal.

The assessee submitted that the assessee while filing return of income, relied upon the figure of salary income as mentioned in salary certificate in Form No. 16 issued by the employer.

It was pointed out that there was a difference between Form No. 26AS and Form 16 despite both were provided by the same employer.

It was contended that as the assessee admitted income as per Form 16, it cannot be said that such difference represents concealment.

The Tribunal opined that with regard to salary, there was a difference between amounts as per Form No. 16 and Form No. 26AS and both were provided by the employer and the assessee has filed his return of income in accordance with Form No.16 issued by the employer.

The Tribunal held that in view of the above facts, it could not be said that the assessee had concealed amount or furnished inaccurate particulars of income.

Download Full Judgment Click Here >>

Share

Recent Posts

  • Income Tax

HC declines to direct ITD to investigate Tax Evasion Petition due to limitation

High Court declines to direct ITD to investigate allegations of tax evasion as per Tax Evasion Petition due to limitation…

18 minutes ago
  • Income Tax

SLP dismissed against condoning delay in filing Form 10B as CA wasn’t aware of online filing

Condoning delay in filing audit report in Form 10B as CA of the assessee was not aware of newly introduced…

3 hours ago
  • Income Tax

No bar prohibiting simultaneous penalty u/s 271B and 271A of Income Tax Act

There is no bar in penalty u/s 271B for non-audit u/s 44AB if penalty u/s 271A is also levied for…

7 hours ago
  • Income Tax

Cash book cannot be rejected when availability of stock is not disputed

Cash book cannot be rejected when availability of stock in trade is not disputed as per stock register which is…

7 hours ago
  • Income Tax

Section 148 of it Act after 01.04.2021, not require recording reason to believe

Section 148 of Income Tax Act after 01.04.2021, does not even require recording reason to believe. In a recent judgment,…

1 day ago
  • Income Tax

Income Tax Deptt. Lucknow to hire Young Professional for assisting before ITAT

Income Tax Department, Lucknow is hiring Young Professional for assisting the Departmental Officers posted in various benches of ITAT, Lucknow…

1 day ago