GST Helpdesk   Subscription   Demo   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
What's New Case Laws Highlights Articles News Forum Short Notes Statutory TMI SMS More ...
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (6) TMI 1035 - PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT

2016 (6) TMI 1035 - PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT - [2016] 389 ITR 46 - Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - disallowance of expenditure under Section 40(a)(ia) - Held that:- The assessee had made a claim of deduction in the return of income. No finding has been recorded by the authorities below that the claim made by the assessee is malafide. It has been categorically recorded by the Tribunal after examining the entire material on record that the CIT(A) had rightly cancelled the penalty against the assessee. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nished inaccurate particulars of his income. In the present case, the claim made by the assessee has not been shown to be suffering from any of these conditions. In the absence of any finding recorded by the CIT(A) or the Tribunal with regard to the claim of the assessee that it was malafide, there is no error in cancelling the penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer. - Decided against revenue - ITA No. 417 of 2015 (O&M) - Dated:- 16-3-2016 - Ajay Kumar Mittal And Raj Rahul Garg, JJ. For the 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

the CIT(A) deleting the penalty levied for assessment year 2006-07 who has relied upon the decision of ITAT Delhi in AT&T Communication Services India Pvt. Limited (42 DTR 22) and the decision relied upon by the Hon'ble ITAT is adequately countered by the judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Zoom Communication (P) Limited (2010) 327 ITR 510? 2. A few facts relevant for the decision of the controversy involved as narrated in the appeal may be noticed. The a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nance of cars under section 40(a)(ia) amounting to ₹ 1,94,593/-. iv) Addition on account of capitalization of interest amounting to ₹ 5,82,625/- plus ₹ 2053/- plus ₹ 8302/-. v) Addition under section 40A(3) amounting to ₹ 18,297/-. vi) Addition on account of disallowance under section 80IC on reallocation of expenses amounting to ₹ 28,63,569/-. vii) Addition amounting to ₹ 1,42,520/- on account of interest debited to Dera Bassi unit and treated as relati .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

c) of the Act on all the issues amounting to ₹ 22,88,770/- vide order dated 29.3.2012, Annexure A.4. The assessee filed appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)]. Vide order dated 1.7.2013, Annexure A.5, the CIT(A) cancelled the penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer. The revenue filed appeal before the Tribunal. Vide order dated 19.5.2015, Annexure A.6, the Tribunal upheld the order passed by the CIT(A). Hence the instant appeal by the revenue. 3. We have heard lea .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

lled the penalty against the assessee. It was further recorded that the assessee made a bonafide claim of deduction of the expenditure and even though it was not acceptable to the revenue would not lead to the conclusion that the assessee had concealed the particulars of income or filed inaccurate particulars of income. The relevant findings recorded by the Tribunal read thus:- 8. We have considered the rival submissions and material available on record. The issue involved in the appeal is regar .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rial against assessee to prove that assessee has concealed the particulars of income or has furnished inaccurate particulars of income. The appeal of the assessee on substantial question of law with regard to disallowance under the provision had been admitted by Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court. The Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Haryana Warehousing Corporation 314 ITR 215 held as under:- Held. Dismissing the appeal that the deduction claimed by the ass .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Advanced Search


Latest Notifications:

    Dated      Category

20-7-2017 Cus (NT)

20-7-2017 GST CESS Rate

19-7-2017 IT

19-7-2017 IT

18-7-2017 IT

18-7-2017 CE (NT)

18-7-2017 CE

18-7-2017 GST CESS Rate

15-7-2017 Kerala SGST

14-7-2017 Andhra Pradesh SGST

14-7-2017 Cus (NT)

14-7-2017 Cus

13-7-2017 Co. Law

13-7-2017 Co. Law

13-7-2017 ADD

13-7-2017 ADD

12-7-2017 Jammu & Kashmir SGST

12-7-2017 Gujarat SGST

12-7-2017 Gujarat SGST

12-7-2017 CGST Rate

More Notifications


Latest Circulars:

21-7-2017 Goods and Services Tax

20-7-2017 Goods and Services Tax

20-7-2017 Goods and Services Tax

19-7-2017 Goods and Services Tax

19-7-2017 Income Tax

18-7-2017 Customs

17-7-2017 Customs

14-7-2017 Income Tax

13-7-2017 Central Excise

13-7-2017 Customs

More Circulars



|| 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