Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

ACIT, CIRCLE 5 (1) , NEW DELHI Versus M/s MOHAN EXPORT (INDIA) PVT. LTD.

2016 (6) TMI 1074 - ITAT DELHI

Penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) - Addition on account of disallowance of u/s. 14A - Held that:- First Appellate Authority has passed a well reasoned order, because the assessee has paid taxes on the issue of disallowance u/s. 14A and assessee has not concealed the facts nor any inaccurate particulars filed. We find that the AO had made addition out of these information filed in the Tax Audit Report and the assessee has disclosed all the facts in the Tax Audit Report in Form No. 3CD under section 44AB of .....

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 Income Tax (Appeals-VII), New Delhi on the following grounds:- 1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) is justified in deleting the penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of ₹ 35,10,826/-.? 2. That the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is erroneous and in not tenable on facts and in law. 3. That the appellant craves leave to add, alter or amend any / all of the grounds of appeal before or during the course of the hearing of the appeal. 2. The facts in brief are that asse .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

19/- of prior period expenses 2.1 Against the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who vide his order dated 11.5.2011 has restricted the addition u/s 14A of ₹ 87,75,445/- to ₹ 35,97,079/- and deleted the balance addition of ₹ 51,78,366/-. The Ld. CIT(A), however, deleted the entire addition of ₹ 67,31,919/- made by the AO on account of disallowance of prior period expenses. Against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) Revenue went in Appeal before t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ITAT dated 2.3.2012 a show cause notice dated 3.10.2012 u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act was issued and served on the assessee, requiring the assessee to explain as to why an order imposing penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) may not be passed in the case of the assessee. In response thereto, the Assessee filed its written reply dated 10.10.2012 stating therein that the assessee has neither concealed particulars of income nor furnished inaccurate particulars of income to attract the penalty provisions of section 2 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ugned order dated 30.9.2013 has deleted the penalty in dispute and allowed the appeal of the Assessee. 4. Now the Revenue is aggrieved against the impugned order and filed the present appeal before the Tribunal. 5. At the time of hearing Ld. DR relied upon the order of the AO and reiterated the contentions raised by the Revenue in the grounds and requested that penalty in dispute imposed by the AO may be sustained. 6. On the contrary, during the hearing, Ld. Authorised Representative of the Asse .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

First Appellate Authority has elaborately discussed the issue in dispute by considering the submissions of the assessee and adjudicated the issue in dispute at page nos. 6 to 7 in his impugned order. The relevant portion of the impugned order are reproduced as under:- "I have perused the penalty Order, written submission, grounds of appeals out of the two additions under Section 14-A of ₹ 35,97,079 and the DDA misuse charges of ₹ 67,31,919/- the appellant company had paid taxes .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

isallowed or not. After the Delhi High Court's order, the matter is settled now. Considering these facts and as appellant had now. Considering these facts and as appellant had paid taxes on 14-A disallowance. The second addition is on account of DDA misuse charges of ₹ 67,31,919/- which was held by Hon'ble ITAT as the penalty paid for infraction of law cannot be called commercial losses incurred by the assessee ad it is not a normal incident of the business. The appellant company h .....

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 initial stage. There is no concealment of facts by appellant company nor any inaccurate particulars filed. The AO had made addition out of these information filed in Tax Audit Report. The dispute with DDA lasted for 10 years. It is shown in Annexure-H in the Tax Audit Report in Form No. 3CD Section 44AB of the I.T. Act. The AR relied on the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Reliance Petro Products (P) Ltd. 322 ITR 158 (SC). Considering the observation of Hon ble Supreme C .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| 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