TMI Blog2010 (5) TMI 824X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... agar Circle ITO, Gandhinagar Ward-1 u/s.143(3) of Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ) vide their orders dated 12-12-2006 for assessment years 2003-04 and 2004-05 respectively. The penalty under dispute u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act was levied by ACIT Gandhinagar Circle and ITO Ward-1 u/s.143(3) vide their orders dated 28-06-2007. 2. The only common issue in these appeals of Revenue is as regards to the order of CIT(A) deleting the penalty levied by Assessing Officer u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act. In ITA No.185/Ahd/2008 Revenue has raised the following two effective grounds:- (1) The learned CIT(Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the penalty of ₹ 5,28,290 levied U/s.271(1) of the Act. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... completion method. Accordingly, he worked out the taxable income of the assessee and it agreed to the computation suggested by the AO and did not file any appeal in quantum. The AO initiated penalty proceedings u/s.271(1) of the Act. 4. During the penalty proceedings the Assessing Officer noted that the assessee has not offered any amount of addition voluntarily and also failed to explain the reasons for not following the correct accounting method, as the work-in-progress to arrive at profit of year is crucial for determining the true income. According to him, assessee has concealed the income by furnishing inaccurate particulars of income and accordingly levied penalty u/s.271(1) of the Act. Aggrieved, assessee preferred appeal be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nk there was no case of levy of penalty for furnishing inaccurate particular of income in the instant case. Hence, the penalty of ₹ 5,28,290/- is quashed. 5. We have heard the rival contentions and gone through the facts of the case. Before us Ld. SR-DR, Dr. Jayant Javari stated that the Assessing Officer has rightly levied the penalty as the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of income as he has not followed the correct method of accounting for computing its income. On the other hand, Ld. counsel, Shri Sanjay R Shah stated that this is only change in method of accounting by the Assessing Officer and by virtue of which income has also changed. He stated that, in case the assessee s method in previous year is also chan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of fact, the assessee has given inaccurate particulars. In Webster s Dictionary, the word inaccurate has been defined as: not accurate, not exact or correct; not according to truth erroneous as an inaccurate statement, copy or transcript. We have already seen the meaning of the word particulars in the earlier part of this judgment. Reading the words in conjunction, they must mean the details supplied in the return, which are not accurate, not exact or correct, not according to truth or erroneous. We must hasten to add here that in this case, there is no finding that any details supplied by the assessee in its return were found to be incorrect or erroneous or false. Such not being the case, there would be no question o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
