TMI Blog2012 (10) TMI 1083X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iled the return of income for A.Y.2006-07 and claimed deduction U/s. 80IB(10), he knew that it was not possible to obtain the completion certificate before the due date and thus AO has rightly held that the claim has been made deliberately by concealing the facts. 2. We have heard the Learned D.R.. None was present for the assessee. 3. The solitary issue which arises for our consideration is whether the Ld CIT(A) justified in cancelling the penalty levied by the A.O. u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act on the disallowance of the claim of ₹ 28,06,265/- and ₹ 90,263/- under the provisions of Sec. 80 IB (10) and 40(a)(ia) of the Act respectively. 4. The facts which reveal from the record are as under. The assessee firm is in the bu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... alty of ₹ 9,75,000/- vide order dated 22nd June 2009.The assessee challenged the order before the Ld CIT and Ld. CIT deleted the penalty levied by the A.O. The Ld CIT has deleted the penalty levied by the A.O. The Ld CIT has dealt with this issue in detail for deleting the penalty levied by the A.O. 5. In our opinion, the findings of the Ld CIT(A) needs to be supported. The operative part of the order of the Ld CIT(A) is as under : 12. Further, the Hon ble Supreme Court in C.I.T v. Reliance Petro Products Pvt. Ltd. (supra) has held as follows : .we have to only see as to whether in this case, as a matter of fact, the assessee has given inaccurate particulars. In Webster s Dictionary, the word inaccurate has been defined ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... furnishing of inaccurate particulars is made out so far as the disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) is concerned. Admittedly, there was a breach of TDS provisions, for which the law has separately enacted provisions for charging of interest, as well as for levy of penalty. 14. As regards the maximum allowable commercial space under the amended law, the issue is a highly contentious one on which judicial opinion itself was divided at the relevant time, leading to the constitution of a Special Bench of the Hon ble ITAT. Further, no facts have been brought to light by the learned AO which establish that any facts were concealed or inaccurate particulars were furnished. At best, it was a case of incorrect reading of the law or failure to ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the time of assessment proceedings along with the return. When it was found that some of the conditions for claiming the deduction u/s. 80IB (10) in respect of the Housing Project Rohan Heights were not fulfilled, the assessee withdrew his claim. We further find that so far as disallowance made u/s. 40(a)(ia) is concerned, i.e. towards non-deduction of the TDS, nowhere it is the case of the A.O that any bogus claim is made by the assessee. In our opinion, the assessee s case is squarely covered by the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Petro Products Pvt. Ltd., 322 ITR 158 (SC). In the said case, their Lordships have held that merely because the claim is disallowed which is otherwise bonafide, the asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
