TMI Blog2013 (7) TMI 579X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ucts Ltd [2010 (3) TMI 80 - SUPREME COURT] - Decided against Revenue. - Income Tax Appeal No. 1133 of 2008 - - - Dated:- 24-6-2013 - Mohit S. Shah, C.J. And M. S. Sanklecha,JJ. For the Petitioner : Mr. Arvind Pinto For the Respondent : Mr. Satish Mody and Ms. Aasifa Khan ORDER P.C: This Appeal filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act ), challenges the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (in short the Tribunal ), Mumbai dated 27 February, 2008 upholding the order of CIT(A) deleting penalty under Section 271 (1)(c) of the said Act. 2. This Appeal relates to Assessment Year 199293. 3. The Revenue has raised the following question of law for consideration of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ulars of income on its part. The respondentassessee had not offered the amount attributable to goodwill to tax after having fully disclosed all facts in its return of income and balance sheet which was filed by them. However, the Assessing Officer did not accept the submission and imposed penalty of Rs.53.05 lakhs upon the respondentassessee on the ground that there was a blatant violation of law on the part of the respondentassessee in having acted in breach of Section 45 (4) of the said Act. 6. Being aggrieved, the respondentassessee filed an Appeal with the CIT(A). By an order dated 27 November, 2006, the CIT(A) set aside the order of the Assessing Officer and held that no penalty is imposable upon the respondentassessee. This was on t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o not following the decision of this Court in the matter of CIT (A) v/s. A. N. Naik Associates reported in 265 ITR 346. As against the above, the Counsel for the respondentassessee submits that there was complete disclosure on their part inasmuch as the return of income as well as the balance sheet filed along with return of income disclosed the writing off of the goodwill amount by debiting the partners capital account. Consequently, no penalty is imposable upon the respondent assessee under Section 271(1)(c) of the said act. itxa-1133-2008 (chamber) 9. On facts, we find that there has been no concealment of particulars of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income on the part of the respondent assessee in filing its return ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
