TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 1383X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... able explanation for not pursuing the quantum addition in appeal as the related quantum addition is completely tax neutral. In view of these discussions, as also bearing in mind entirety of the case, we approve well reasoned conclusion arrived at by the learned CIT(A) and decline to interfere in the matter. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No.1313/Ahd/2012 - - - Dated:- 14-8-2015 - Pramod Kumar AM and Kul Bharat JM For The Appellant : D.V. Singh For The Respondent : None ORDER Per Pramod Kumar AM: By way of this appeal, the Assessing Officer has called into question correctness of order dated 6th March, 2012 passed by the ld. CIT(A), in the matter of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aggregating to ₹ 2,30,62,904/-. On these facts, the Assessing Officer imposed the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act by justifying the same as follows :- I have considered the reply of the assessee. In this case, in the reassessment, the addition was repeated as the assessee could not give the name of the Assessing Officer with whom the creditor was assessed and, thus, it was held that the assessee had not discharged its onus in proving the credit worthiness of the creditor. It was the contention of the assessee that the information was available to the Income-tax Department and the Assessing Officer could have made access to this data base. This contention of the assessee is not acceptable as the loan taken by the assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s concerned. In this case, the fact remains that the assessee has not been able to establish the credit of ₹ 10 lakhs in the name of Shri Kamleh A Mehta by bringing on record the creditworthiness of the said person. The same amount to filing of inaccurate particulars or concealment of income. Clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 271 provides for penalty in case where the Assessing Officer is satisfied that any person has concealed particulars of his income or furnished inaccurate particulars of such income . By way of deeming provisions in Explanation 1 to sub-section 1, the amount added or disallowed in computing the total income shall be deemed to represent the income in respect of which particulars have been concealed. Thus, a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llowing two reasons, the amount so added shall be deemed to be the income in respect of which particulars have been concealed : [a] Such person fails to offer an explanation or offers an explanation which is found by the Assessing Officer or the Commissioner (Appeals) or Commissioner to be false; or [b] Such person offers an explanation which he is not able to substantiate and fails to prove that such explanation is bona fide and that all the facts relating to the same and material to the computation of his total income have been disclosed by him. In these circumstances and that the assessee has failed to offer any plausible explanation, I am satisfied that the assessee has wilfully, knowingly and without reasonable cause ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s filed by the appellant regarding this credit appears to be bonafide and the A.O. has not made out any case in the order while levying the penalty to show that the explanation is either false or is not bonafide except for again mentioning the fact that the appellant did not provide the details of the A.O. Under such circumstances, penalty u/s 271(1)(c) is not leviable in this case. Hence, the A.O. is directed to delete this penalty. 4. The Assessing Officer is aggrieved and is in appeal before us. 5. We have heard the learned Departmental Representative, but none appeared for the assessee. We have also perused the material on record and duly considered facts of the case in the light of the applicable legal position. 6. We find ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
