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

2016 (3) TMI 821 - ITAT DELHI

2016 (3) TMI 821 - ITAT DELHI - TMI - Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Held that:- CIT (A) while confirming the penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer, has over looked the facts that the assessee has filed revised return when the assessee company itself came to the knowledge that there was an error in its return for A.Y 2003-04. The fact that company has at no stage hidden or intentionally acted which shows that they have deliberately filed the inaccurate, inadequate returns u/s 271(1)(c). If there is .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

itself has filed the revised return this act shows that it is not intentional furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income on behalf of the assessee. The case laws placed before us are also in support of the assessee’s case. - Decided in favour of assessee - I.T.A .No.-1755/DEL/2012, I.T.A .No.-3052/DEL/2011 - Dated:- 16-2-2016 - SHRI J. S. REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER For The Appellant : Sh. S.K. Aggarwal, CA. Ms. Meha Chauhan, CA For The Respondent : Sh. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s erred in deleting the penalty u/s271(1)(c) of the I.T Act, on account of addition of ₹ 17,42,063/- made by disallowing expenses incurred by reimbursement of communication fees paid to the directors of the assessee company. 3. Ld. CIT(A) ignored the finding recorded by the Assessing Officer and the fact that assessee furnished inaccurate particulars of its income by claiming non-allowable expenses on account of reimbursement of communication fees. 3. The grounds of appeal for assessee are .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ssment order and confirmed by Ld. CIT(A) and the Hon ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ( ITAT ). The same has been done ignoring the fact that the appellant has made a full and true disclosure of all facts in respect of the claims made in the return of income. Accordingly, there was neither any concealment of income no furnishing of any inaccurate particulars of income. 3. That, on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the order passed by Ld. CIT (A) confirming the penalty ignoring .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

) of the Act without establishing whether there was failure on the part of the appellant to offer any explanation or that the explanations offered were false or that the explanations given by the appellant were not bonafide, when admittedly full and true disclosure was made in the return of income and during the assessment proceedings by the appellant. 5. That, on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the order passed by Ld. CIT (A) confirming the penalty on the ground that the dis .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

incorporated in India on 12th March 1996. During A.Y 2003-04, the appellant company was engaged in the business of freight forwarders providing services of freight handling, transportation to the exporters and importers etc. It entered into numerous transactions with its overseas group companies in the course of providing freight forwarding services to its customers for export as well as import of cargo on reciprocal basis. 5. The assessee company discontinued the business with effect from 1 Ap .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

, tax audit report etc. 7. Subsequent to the filing of above return of income for A.Y 2003-04 in the course of audit of books of accounts and financial statements for F.Y 2003-04 relevant to A.Y 2004-05 the auditors found that the revenue in respect of transactions with overseas group companies in the last quarter of F. Y 2002-03 relevant to A. Y 2003-04 was overstated by net amount of ₹ 137, 73,479/-. Accordingly in the books of accounts for A.Y 2004-05, the error was rectified by reducin .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

itions and disallowances. The CIT (A) disposed off the appeal vides his order dated 21st August 2007, partly allowing the appeal. The Hon ble ITAT disposed off the assessee s and departments appeal by combined order dated 13th October 2010. The appeal against the order of Hon ble ITAT was not preferred due to discontinuance of business and as all the employees of the assessee had left. 9. The A.O passed an order u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act dated 30th March 2009 levying a penalty aggregation to S .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

CIT (A) s order wherein it has been categorically stated that in quantum appeal, the ITAT deleted the said disallowance as not being the payment for royalty or fees for technical services & CIT(A) held that as disallowance has been deleted by the ITAT, there is no escapement of income and, therefore, no penalty should be levied and therefore, we hold that the revenue s appeal does not sustain as the quantum appeal on this issue has been decided against the revenue and penalty will not stand .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

iled. The AR also submitted that auditor himself has admitted that there was an error and no authority whatsoever has stated that the revised return were false. Therefore, there was a full disclosure on part of the assessee. The assessee relied on the judgment of Sherwani Hospitalities Ltd VS. CIT 2013-35 Taxman.com 271 Delhi High Court wherein in Para 19 &20 it is held that it is not uncommon and unusual for the assessee to bonafidely claim a particular expenditure as revenue deduction and .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

claim which is held as not sustainable under law should not lead to penalization when the assessee had furnished full details in the return itself in the claim is debatable, reasonably plausible or may will have been accepted. The assessee also relied upon the CIT Vs. Reliance Petro Product Pvt. Ltd. 2010 322 ITR 158 Hon'ble Supreme Court. The assessee also relied upon the Hon ble Madras High Court decision in the case of CIT Vs. N. Nagraj Ball wherein the Hon ble Karnataka High Court again .....

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