TMI Blog2010 (5) TMI 658X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... EVANI H. N. MS., JJ. JUDGMENT Ms. H. N. Devani J.- 1. In this appeal under section 260A of the Income- tax Act, 1961 (the Act), the appellant-Revenue has proposed the following three questions : "(1) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law in upholding the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) who had deleted the penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) by accepting the fact that the wrong claim of deduction under section 80-IA was a bona fide error ? (2) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appel- late Tribunal is right in law in deleting the penalty by holding that where the return filed includes furnishing of inaccura ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , calling upon the assessee to show cause as to why deduc- tion claimed under section 80-IA should not be disallowed. In reply to the said notice, the assessee, vide letter dated March 18, 2002, informed the Assessing Officer that it had already filed a revised return of income under section 139(5) on March 15, 2002, wherein no claim under section 80-IA had been made. The Assessing Officer did not consider the assessee's claim under the revised return and framed assessment determining the total income at Rs. 69,74,621 as against the returned income of Rs.18,96,110. In penalty proceedings, the Assessing Officer observed that the claim for deduction under section 80-IA was prima facie a wrong claim and that the said wrong claim was brought to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... drawing the claim after the Assessing Officer brought the same to its notice, it cannot be said that the assessee had not concealed its income and furnished inaccurate particulars. 5. A perusal of the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) indicates that after filing of the return of income by the respondent-assessee claiming deduction under section 80-IA of the Act, the Assessing Officer had issued notice dated March 14, 2002, under section 154 of the Act in relation to the assessment year 2000-01. Immediately on the next day the assessee filed a revised income for the year under consideration, that is, the assessment year 2001-02 withdrawing the claim under section 80-IA. The Commis- sioner (Appeals) further found that the Assessing Offi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r a bona fide belief and that since default had been committed under a bona fide belief, which was rectified by filing a revised return, the assessee was not liable to punishment under section 271(1)(c) and accordingly set aside the penalty. 6. As can be seen from the impugned order of the Tribunal, the Tribunal has found that as a matter of fact that the assessee had made a bona fide claim which was later on withdrawn by filing a revised return. Considering the decision of the Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. J. K. A. Sub- ramania Chettiar [1977] 110 ITR 602 (Mad) on which reliance was placed on behalf of the Revenue, the Tribunal was of the view that if after having originally filed the return of income, if an assessee subseque ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
