TMI Blog2014 (2) TMI 1029X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ncing corroborative evidence, the Revenue may justify addition, but in the matter of penalty proceedings, the onus lies heavily on the Revenue to prove that the assessee had concealed its income or has filed inaccurate particulars of its income – Relying upon Reliance Petroproducts 2010 (3) TMI 80 - SUPREME COURT] – thus, no penalty is leviable u/s 271(1)(c) – Decided in favour of Assessee. - I.T.A. No. 3360 /AHD/2010 - - - Dated:- 21-2-2014 - Shri G. C. Gupta And Shri Anil Chaturvedi, A.M.,JJ. For the Appellant : Ms. Urvashi Shodhan For the Respondent : Shri J.P. Jhangid, Sr. D.R. ORDER Per Shri Anil Chaturvedi,A.M. 1. This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of CIT(A), VI, Ahmedabad dated 02.11.2010 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ny but however in the computation of income, the same was considered as Revenue expenditure as it was paid as licence fee for the use of technical know-how. The submission of the Assessee for allowing it as Revenue expenditure was not found acceptable to the A.O. as he was of the view that as per Section 35AB, only 1/6th consideration paid by the Assessee for acquiring any know-how for use for the purpose of his business shall be deducted in computing the profits and gains of the business for that previous year and the balance amount shall be deducted in equal installments in succeeding 5 years. A.O. therefore did not allow the deduction of the entire technical know-how fees u/s. 37 of the Act but however allowed only 1/6th of the amount sp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6. The ld. D.R. on the other hand submitted that the provisions of Section 35AB were inserted by Finance Act, 1985 with effect from 01.04.1986 and since the Assessee is limited company which is guided and advised by qualified persons, the Assessee should have been aware about the provisions of the Act and therefore should not have claimed an expenditure which was not allowable as per the provisions of the Act. He further submitted that Assessee had claimed excess deduction in respect of technical know-how fees despite the fact that the provisions of Section 35AB applied and only 1/6 deduction was allowable. By claiming deduction of entire expenses, Assessee had furnished inaccurate particulars of income which could be detected only on sc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent proceedings and appellate proceedings the submissions in support of its claim as revenue expenses were submitted by assessee and the same have not been proved to be false or not bonafide by the Revenue. A case for levy of penalty for concealment of income has to be evaluated in terms of provisions of Explanation. 1 to Section. 271(1)(c), as per which if in relation to any addition in the assessment, the assessee offers no explanation or offers explanation which is found to be false or is not able to substitute the explanation and is also not able to prove that the explanation is bonafide, the addition made would amount to concealment of particulars of income. It is a settled legal position that penalty proceedings are different from ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
