9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (7) TMI 336X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order of the Assessing Officer imposing penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. 2. Penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act was imposed by the Assessing Officer under the following facts. The assessee is a company, engaged in the business of computer software development. The assessee filed its return of income for the A.Y. 2009-10 belatedly on 18.10.2010. In the return of income so filed, the assessee claimed deduction u/s. 10A of the Act in respect of profits derived from export of computer software. U/s. 10A(1A) proviso, no deduction u/s. 10A will be allowed to the assessee, who does not furnish return of income on or before the due date specified u/s. 139(1) of the Act. 3. The AO noticed that the assessee had claimed deduction u/s. 10A of the Ac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted, leading to attrition in employment in the assessee's office in Bangalore due to desertion of employees seeking better opportunities elsewhere. There was a death in the family of Principal Officer and he could not attend the work several days leading to Finance & Accountancy sections not being properly looked after. The director of the assessee had to look for a suitable auditor/counsel to enable representation before the income-tax authorities. 6. The assessee also explained that the denial of deduction u/s. 10A was owing to technical lapse and there could be no doubt that assessee was engaged in the business of computer software and had brought in to the country foreign exchange from such export. The assessee submitted that it had di ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) also held that adhoc disallowance of Rs. 10 lakhs out of administrative selling and other expenses were made only for non-production of bills & vouchers and there is no material on record to show that the expenses disallowed were bogus or personal in nature. The CIT(A) therefore was of the view that the assessee cannot be said to be guilty of having furnished inaccurate particulars of income or having concealed the particulars of income. Penalty imposed was cancelled by the CIT(A). 10. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(Appeals), the Revenue has filed the present appeal before the Tribunal. 11. The ld. DR reiterated the stand of the Revenue as contained in the grounds of appeal filed before the Tribunal. According to the Revenue, conduct of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... proceedings. 14. As far as the complaint of the Revenue that the assessee furnished inaccurate particulars by making wrong claim of deduction u/s. 10A of the Act is concerned, we find that this is not the basis on which deduction u/s. 10A was denied to the assessee. As rightly contended by the assessee, deduction u/s. 10A was denied only for technical reasons viz., return of income not having been filed on or before the due date u/s. 139(1) of the Act. In our view, therefore, the contentions put forth by the Revenue before us is unsustainable. In our view, the CIT(A) has rightly come to the conclusion that mere making of a claim for deduction u/s. 10A which is not allowed, cannot lead to the conclusion that assessee is guilty of having fur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
