Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2016 (12) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (12) TMI 503 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURTPenalty under section 271(1)(c) - proportionate disallowance of interest on the amount advanced by the respondent-assessee to its sister concern - Held that:- What is important is that it was found that there was no concealment of the particulars of income and that the particulars furnished were not inaccurate either. In these circumstances, we see no reason to interfere with the concurrent findings of both the appellate authorities as there was no concealment. Nor is any interference warranted with the exercise of discretion in not levying the penalty.- Decided in favour of assessee. Incorrect claim while calculating the MAT under Section 115JB - Held that:- The provisions of Explanation 1(viii) of Section 115JB(1)define book profit to mean the net profit as shown in the profit and loss account for the relevant previous year prepared under sub-section (2), as increased by the amount of deferred tax, if any such amount is credited to the profit and loss account. Thus, we will assume that the deferred tax was to be included while computing the MAT under Section 115JB. However, the CIT (Appeals) and the Tribunal deleted the penalty, inter alia, on account of the fact that sub-clause (viii) was introduced in the year 2008 with retrospective effect from 01.04.2001 i.e. before the return was filed for the assessment year 2007 with which we are concerned. It is not the appellant’s case that there was suppression of any material or a deliberate mis-statement. The mere fact that an incorrect claim was made was held not to be sufficient in the facts and circumstances of the case to initiate the penalty proceedings. There is no warrant for interference with the exercise of discretion. - Decided in favour of assessee.
|