Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2010 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2010 (2) TMI 769 - ITAT, NEW DELHIPenalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Income of the assessee from franchisees and the partnerships would have gone down by 1% of the turnover of the franchisees and the partnership on account of the royalty. Thus, the expenditure even as per the A.O. is an allowable expenditure though in the hands of the income generating apparatus being business of the partnership and the franchisee centers. Thus it cannot be said that by paying the royalty from the hands of the assessee is a concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. - the assessee has not furnished inaccurate particulars nor concealed the income for the purpose of levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. In these circumstances, the penalty as levied by the A.O. and as confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) stands deleted. Period of limitation for levy of penalty u/s 275 - proviso to clause (a) of sub-section (1) of Section 275 - Held that:- the outer limit of passing the order will be one year from the end of the financial year in which the order of the learned CIT(A) was received; and in cases where the matter is carried further in appeal to the Tribunal, the time limit shall be six months from the end of the month in which the order of the Tribunal is received by the Commissioner. Thus, it is held that the order of penalty was passed within the time prescribed by the statute u/s 275(1)(a).
|