New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (12) TMI 186 - ITAT DELHI

2015 (12) TMI 186 - ITAT DELHI - TMI - Penalty under Section 271(1)(c) - CIT(A) deleted the levy - Held that:- A perusal of the penalty order shows that the penalty has been levied for alleged offence of concealing the particular of income but we find that the Assessing Officer had not given a finding in the penalty order as to how and in what manner the respondent assessee company had furnished inaccurate particulars of income resulting in addition to the returned income except making the bald .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Appellant : Shri Raman Kant Garg, Sr. DR For the Respondent : Shri Naveen Gupta, Adv ORDER Per Inturi Rama Rao, AM The present appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order of CIT(A), dated 06.03.2012 passed for the assessment year 2001-02 deleting the penalty of ₹ 1,13,46,367/- levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act (for short "the Act"). The Revenue raised the following grounds of appeal: i. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ld .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

net loss of ₹ 2,89,52,667/-. Against the said return of income, the assessment was completed under Section 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 27.01.2004 at a taxable loss of ₹ 74,323/-. While framing the assessment order, the Assessing Officer disallowed the following items: i. Disallowance of expenses for software development of ₹ 2,42,15,382/- ii. Expenses preoperationalized of ₹ 42,28,474/- iii. Brought forward losses of ₹ 1,26,93,243/- was not allowed to be carr .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

/- levied the penalty of ₹ 1,13,45,367/-. Being aggrieved by the order of penalty, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A) who vide impugned order dated 6th March, 2012, deleted the penalty placing reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Petro Products Pvt. Ltd., 189 Taxman 322 (SC). Being aggrieved, the Revenue is before us with the present appeal. 3. Learned Sr. DR argued that the CIT(A) is not justified in deleting the penalty as the additions .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

271(1)(c) of the Act. A perusal of the penalty order shows that the penalty has been levied for alleged offence of concealing the particular of income but we find that the Assessing Officer had not given a finding in the penalty order as to how and in what manner the respondent assessee company had furnished inaccurate particulars of income resulting in addition to the returned income except making the bald charge against the respondent assessee company that it had furnished inaccurate particul .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

lhi) (f) CIT v. Shivnarayan Jamnalal & Co. [1998] 232 ITR 311/[1996] 89 Taxman 420 (MP) (g) CIT v. T. Abdul Majeed [1998] 232 ITR 50/[1997] 93 Taxman 491 (Ker) The hon'ble apex court in the case of Dilip N. Shroff v. Jt. CIT [2007] 291 ITR 519/161 Taxman 218 had held vide paras 56 and 57 as follows (page 546) : "The term 'inaccurate particulars' is not defined. Furnishing of all assessment of value of the property may not by itself be furnishing of inaccurate particulars. Ev .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e, it should have been found as of fact that he has not disclosed all the facts which was material to the computation of his income. The explanation, having regard to the decisions of the court, must be preceded by a finding as to how and in what manner he furnished the particulars of his income. It is beyond any doubt or dispute that for the said purpose the Income-tax Officer must arrive at a satisfaction in this behalf. (See CIT v. Ram Commercial Enterprises Ltd. [2000] 246 ITR 568 (Delhi) an .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

mount to furnishing inaccurate particulars regarding the income of the assessee. Such a claim made in the return cannot amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars". 7. The Delhi High Court in the case of Karan Raghav Exports (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [2012] 349 ITR 112/21 taxmann.com 8/[2013] 212 Taxman 55 (Mag.) has held that claim made by the assessee might have been rejected, but it would not be said that claim was not plausible or legally tenable and therefore it cannot be said that the assesse .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version