TMI Blog2015 (3) TMI 45X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es of the case, the assessee's non-appealing of the issue does not tantamount to admission of addition in terms of Mak Data (P) Ltd. vs. CIT (2013 (11) TMI 14 - SUPREME COURT) judgment. Since all the material particulars were filed by the assessee along with return of income and they were part of the return. The ratio of Reliance Petro Products (P) Ltd. (2010 (3) TMI 80 - SUPREME COURT ) is squarely applicable to assessee's case relied for deletion of penalties in respect of IMACID and Captive Power Plant. Ground of the Revenue in respect of miscellaneous income u/s 80IA claim is dismissed. - Decided in favour of assessee - ITA No. 527/JP/2012, ITA No. 556/JP/2012 - - - Dated:- 19-12-2014 - Shri R. P. TolaniAnd Shri T. R. Meena, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the issues as raised by the assessee and Revenue are covered by ITAT, Jaipur Bench order in assessee's own penalty appeal order for AY 2002-03 dated 24-09-2014 and quantum appeal for AY 2003-04 dated 28-7-2011. 5.1 Apropos assessee's appeal, it is contended by the ld. Counsel Shri P J Pardiwala Sr. Adv. that the penalty was imposed in respect of a bonafide mistake disclosing the net receipts without including TDS in respect of Morocco Joint Venture Company. This Bench of ITAT vide its order dated 24-09-2014 in assessee's own case for the assessment year 2002-03 has deleted the penalty on the same issue by following observations. 19. Apropos addition on account of IMACID deposit, we find that the assessee had given proper ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... u/s 80IA in respect of Captive Power Plant. The ld. DR is heard. 7.2 The ld. Counsel for the assessee contends that quantum addition in this behalf has been deleted by ITAT vide its order dated 28-07-2011 in assessee's own case by following observations. 22.9 Considering the above discussions, we reject the contentions of the revenue that the deduction u/s 80IA is not available in respect of Captive Power Plant for the assessment year 2004-05 on the ground that it is the 11th year of the commercial production. As per Section 80IA (2), it is to be considered that the assessee has exercised the option for the first time for the assessment year 1999-2000 and hence deduction 80IA will be available for 10 consecutive assessment years ou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... penalty u/s 271(1) is not attracted, mere making a claim which is not sustainable in law, will not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars Since all the particulars were furnished in the return of income and in respect of this addition, decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Reliance Petroproducts (P) Ltd. (supra) is squarely applicable, thus the penalty is not leviable. 8.3 The ld. DR contends that the assessee had not disputed these additions which amount to admission of addition. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Mak Data (P) Ltd. vs. CIT 358 ITR 593 has held that once the amount is admitted by the assessee then there is no further onus on the AO to establish the factums of conscious concealment. 8.4 T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation and made addition which was not challenged by the assessee in appeal for any reason. In these facts and circumstances of the case, the assessee's non-appealing of the issue does not tantamount to admission of addition in terms of Mak Data (P) Ltd. vs. CIT (supra) judgment. Since all the material particulars were filed by the assessee along with return of income and they were part of the return. The ratio of Reliance Petro Products (P) Ltd. (supra) (SC) is squarely applicable to assessee's case. We have relied on this judgment for deletion of penalties in respect of IMACID and Captive Power Plant. In view thereof, Ground No. (iii) of the Revenue in respect of miscellaneous income u/s 80IA claim is dismissed. 10.0 In the resu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
