TMI Blog2011 (6) TMI 816X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... c), there has to be concealment of particulars of income of the assessee or the assessee must have furnished inaccurate particulars of its income. Present is not the case of concealment of income or it is not the case of Revenue that the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of income. The department has not found out that the assessee has furnished any factual incorrect information and the assessee is not guilty of furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. In our opinion, the conditions laid down in section 271(1)(c) is not complied with. In our opinion, the conditions laid down in section 271(1) (c ) of the Act is not complied with. Being so, levy of penalty is not justified merely because the assessee has claimed certain ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee's case for the assessment year 2005-06 by way of an order dated 24.12.2007 wherein the total income was assessed at ₹ 2,15,78,933, as against the return of income of ₹ 1,86,95,703/-. During the assessment proceedings, it was observed that the assessee had made the following payments by deducting tax at source beyond the due dates stipulated u/s 200(1) of the Act. Amount pertaining to section 194 C : Rs.1,89,380 Amount pertaining to section 194 J : Rs.3,03,050 Amount pertaining to section 194 I : Rs.68,22,868 3.1. Further, it was noticed that the assessee had added back the amounts pert ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t there was an obligation to deduct tax at source out of payment of freight even when the goods are received on 'freight to pay basis', irrespective of the actual payment. Considering that the assessee had violated the provisions of section 200(1) by not deducting tax on such payments, the Assessing Officer made disallowance of ₹ 12,88,649/- u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act. In view of the above disallowance, penalty proceedings u/s 271(1) (c ) were initiated by the Assessing Officer. 4. On appeal the CIT(A) deleted the Penalty. Against this the Revenue is in appeal before us. 5. At the time of hearing on 16.6.2011, none appeared on behalf of the assessee. We heard the Departmental Representative. In this case, penalty is levied ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
