TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 59X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2970/Ahd/2010 - - - Dated:- 26-2-2015 - Shri N.S. Saini And Shri Kul Bharat JJ. For the Appellant : Shri Vimalendu Verma,CIT-DR For the Respondent : Shri S.N. Soparkar, AR ORDER Per Shri Kul Bharat, JUDICIAL MEMBER : This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order of the Ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-VI, Ahmedabad ( CIT(A) in short) dated 26/08/2010 pertaining to Assessment Year (AY) 2003-04. The Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal:- 1. The Ld.CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in deleting the penalty U/s.271(1)(c) on account of excess claim of depreciation of ₹60,264,101/-. 2. The Ld.CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in deleting the penalty U/s.271(1)(c) of the Act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... First ground relates to the deletion of penalty on addition made on account of claim of depreciation, second ground relates to deletion of penalty on deduction claimed u/s.80IA of the Act and third ground relates to deletion of penalty made on account of disallowance of deduction u/s.80IB of the Act. 4. At the outset, ld.Sr.counsel for the assessee submitted that similar disallowances were made in the AY 2002-03 and penalty was also imposed. He submitted that the Hon ble Tribunal (ITAT Ahmedabad D Bench) in ITA Nos.846/Ahd/2006 253/Ahd/2008 for AY 2002- 03, order dated 24/07/2009, has deleted the penalty. 4.1. The ld.CIT-DR could not controvert the submission of the ld.counsel for the assessee. However, he supported the penalty or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessment year 2002-03 in assessee s own case. WE find that in identical facts, the penalty imposed u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act on excess depreciation was cancelled by the Ld.CIT(A) in the case of the assessee in earlier assessment year 2002-03. Against this order, the revenue has preferred an appeal before ITAT and the Tribunal in ITA No.951/Ahd/2008 for the assessment year 2002-03 has confirmed the order of the Ld.CIT(A) cancelling the penalty imposed u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act. We, being in agreement with the decision of the Tribunal on this issue, confirm the order of Ld.CIT(A) by following the order of the Tribunal for the earlier assessment year 2002-03 cancelling the penalty imposed u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act. Accordingly, the Ground No.1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rt of the turbine as a new Industrial Undertaking for the purposes of granting deduction under section 80IA. In view of the above explanation the assessee has stated in his explanation that very same Assessing Officer had scrutinized the return for assessment year 2001-02 and had made disallowance of the assessee s claim and hence was aware about the legal stand of the assessee. The assessee is merely canvassing the same stand in the subsequent assessment year i.e.Assessment year 2002-03 and hence there is no question of any concealment or filing of inaccurate particulars in the return of income. The assessee also put the certificate of the chartered Accountant as required u/s.80IA(7) of the Act which also clearly demonstrate the bona fide ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and the facts of this case being identical with the facts of the case of the assessee in the earlier assessment year 2002-03, cancel the penalty imposed for the relevant assessment year by following the order of the Tribunal for the earlier assessment year 2002-03 and accordingly, ground No.2 of the revenue s appeal is dismissed. 5.4. With regard to the deletion of penalty made on account of disallowance of deduction u/s.80IB of the Act, the Tribunal (ITAT D Bench Ahmedabad) in ITA No.3455/Ahd/2010 CO No.07/Ahd/2011 for AY 2004-05 held as under:- 15. We have considered the rival submissions. We find that the issue of deduction u/s.80-IB of the Act was highly debatable in nature. As the time of filing the return for the assessme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
