TMI Blog2013 (5) TMI 882X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. 271(1)(c) of the Act vide his order dated 28.02.2008. 2. The only issue in this appeal of revenue is against the order of CIT(A) deleting the penalty levied by AO u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act for the disallowance made for non-deduction of TDS on transportation hire charges by invoking the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. For this, revenue has raised following two grounds: 1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) erred in directing the A.O. to delete the penalty without appreciating the fact that assessee company willful violated the provision of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, 1961. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the penalty without taking into account the fact that the assessee company deduc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xpenses in the accounts leading to concealment of income. The said erroneous claim was detected only through investigation of accounts and was not voluntarily offered for taxation. Further, the assessee in its TAR had deliberately made misleading entries to circumvent disallowance u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act. Hence, the case appears to be fit for imposition of penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act and the same is imposed @ 150% of tax sought to be evaded. Aggrieved, assessee preferred appeal before CIT(A), who deleted the penalty by observing as under: I have carefully considered the penalty order, Ld. A.R.s submissions and have gone through case laws cited. There is no dispute that the provisions of sec. 40(a)(ia) were brought into statu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eness of the claim of the assessee has not been disputed by the department. Therefore, it cannot be said that assessee has claimed expenses which are false or not genuine. Assessee has furnished all the relevant facts concerning the claim made by it in the return filed. AO has levied penalty in respect of said amount merely because said claim of the assessee was disallowed u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act as assessee failed to deduct TDS thereon. The Apex Court in the case of Reliance Petroproducts Ltd (supra) has held that a mere making of the claim which is not sustainable in the 1aw, by itself will not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. In the present case, admittedly, assessee made a claim but the same was rejected and disal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
