Case Laws
Acts
Notifications
Circulars
Classification
Forms
Manuals
Articles
News
D. Forum
Highlights
Notes
🚨 Important Update for Our Users
We are transitioning to our new and improved portal - www.taxtmi.com - for a better experience.
⚠️ This portal will be discontinued on 31-07-2025
If you encounter any issues or problems while using the new portal,
please
let us know via our feedback form
so we can address them promptly.
Home
2015 (9) TMI 1360 - HC - Income TaxPenalty under Section 271(1)(c) - disallowance under Section 80IB was made by the Assessing Officer not because of any difference of opinion but because such deduction was not available to the assessee by virtue of specific provision of law - ITAT deleted the penalty - Held that - The CIT(A) as well as the Tribunal had concurrently concluded that the assessee in the computation of income while claiming deduction under Section 80IB of the Act had disclosed complete facts. The assessee had claimed permanent registration as small scale unit by District Industries Centre Patiala. The books of account of the assessee were duly audited. The claim made by the assessee was under bonafide belief that it was a small scale industry. The error on the part of the assessee had occurred due to various notifications issued by the concerned Ministry from time to time fixing the limit of investment to qualify for being small scale industry. The value of exclusive plant and machinery as on 1.4.2004 was Rs. 2.93 crores and because of the addition made in the assessment year under appeal of Rs. 58.33 lacs the total investment came to Rs. 3.51 crores. In such circumstances it could not be said that the assessee had not made a bonafide claim of deduction under Section 80IB of the Act. Therefore the penalty was rightly deleted by CIT(A) and upheld by the Tribunal. We do not find any error in the approach adopted by the CIT(A) as well as the Tribunal - Decided in favour of assessee.
|