TMI Blog2015 (5) TMI 185X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly claiming preliminary expenses every year. During the year under consideration assessee has also claimed ₹ 1,10,000/-, which was disallowed by the AO. We found that similar expenses was allowed by the AO in the scrutiny assessment framed u/s.143(3) for immediately preceding year i.e. A.Y.2003-04. Since the department itself has accepted assessee’s claim for such writing off of preliminary expenses in the immediately preceding assessment year, disallowance of similar claim in subsequent year will not make it a fit case for levy of penalty. Accordingly, we do not find any justification for levy of penalty in respect of disallowance of preliminary expenses of ₹ 1,10,000/- written off during the year under consideration. Since ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . The AO imposed penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act with respect to the disallowance on account of preliminary expenses written off amounting to ₹ 1,10,000/- and on account of bad debts writing off amounting to ₹ 8 lakhs. As per the AO assessee has not filed accurate particulars, therefore, disallowance amounts to concealment of income. Accordingly, he levied penalty u/s.271(1)(c) and the same was confirmed by the CIT(A). Against which, the assessee is in further appeal before us. 3. During the course of hearing before us ld. AR raised additional grounds to the effect that the order passed by the AO imposing penalty u/s.271(1)(c) is barred by limitation as provided u/s.275 of the Act. He contended that as per proviso to Section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o not find any merit in the contention of ld. AR that order so passed was barred by limitation. Accordingly, the additional ground raised by the assessee is dismissed. 7. Now, coming to the merit of the penalty imposed u/s.271(1)(c), we found that assessee was proportionately claiming preliminary expenses every year. During the year under consideration assessee has also claimed ₹ 1,10,000/-, which was disallowed by the AO. We found that similar expenses was allowed by the AO in the scrutiny assessment framed u/s.143(3) for immediately preceding year i.e. A.Y.2003-04. Since the department itself has accepted assessee s claim for such writing off of preliminary expenses in the immediately preceding assessment year, disallowance of si ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
