TMI Blog2014 (3) TMI 952X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... this is not a fit case for levy of penalty and accordingly we set aside the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and delete the penalty. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No. 1019/Chd/2013 - - - Dated:- 20-3-2014 - SHRI T.R. SOOD AND MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA , JJ. For the Appellant : Shri Sudhir Sehgal For the Respondent : Shri Akhilesh Gupta ORDER T. R. Sood (Accountant Member).- This appeal is directed against the order dated August 30, 2013, of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-II. Ludhiana. 2. In this appeal the assessee has filed the following grounds : 1. That the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming penalty of ₹ 3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ould not be levied and various case law were also relied on for this purpose. The Assessing Officer did not find force in the submissions and observed that the assessee has clearly set off brought forwarded unabsorbed depreciation and business losses against provisions of the Act therefore penal provisions were applicable and accordingly minimum penalty at 100 per cent. amounting to ₹ 3,08,000 was levied. 4. On appeal before the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), learned counsel for the assessee reiterated the submissions made before the Assessing officer. He further relied on the decision of the hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Price Waterhouse Cooper P. Ltd. v. CIT C. A. No. 6924 of 2012, [2012] 348 ITR 306 (SC ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ITR 158 (SC). 6. On the other hand, the learned Departmental representative for the Revenue supported the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). 7. We have gone through the rival submissions carefully and find that since Shri Krishan Kumar Mangal died may be his young son was not fully conversant with the affairs of the firm and in the absence of tax consultant who also died he was perhaps wrongly advised to make a claim for set off of brought forward unabsorbed depreciation. It is a settled law that a person cannot be punished for the mistakes committed by counsel for the assessee or his advisors. On the overall circumstances of the case we are of the opinion that this is not a fit case for levy of penalty and acc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
