Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2014 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (1) TMI 893 - AT - Income TaxDisallowance u/s 14A and u/s 40a(ia) of the Act – Held that:- Assessee contended that they had made a voluntary surrender of all the disallowable expenses on his own - all the facts and figures were correctly disclosed and this is not a case of furnishing of inaccurate particulars - On examination of the details furnished, the assessee had suo-moto agreed to the technical disallowance – Relying upon CIT vs. Reliance Petro Products P. Ltd.[2010 (3) TMI 80 - SUPREME COURT] - The CIT(A) held that the assessee has furnished all the required details and that hence no penalty can be levied on technical/legal disallowances u/s 14A or u/s 40(a)(ia) – the order of the CIT(A) upheld – Decided against Revenue. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act - Addition made on liquidated damages – Held that:- The CIT(A) should have deleted the penalty based on the same reasons given for deleting the penalty in the case of disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) and u/s 14A - All the facts and figures regarding the claim were before the Revenue authorities and it is not a case of bogus claim - The claim of the assessee that it is inadvertent computation mistake through oversight appears to be a bonafide explanation - the facts do not suggest that this is not an inadvertent mistake as explained by the assessee - any excess or short provision would be reversed in the subsequent year - The decision in CIT vs. Reliance Petro Products P. Ltd. [2010 (3) TMI 80 - SUPREME COURT] and in Price Waterhouse Coopers P. Ltd. vs CIT [2012 (9) TMI 775 - SUPREME COURT] followed – Penalty levied by the CIT(A) set aside – Decided in favour of Assessee.
|