TMI Blog2016 (2) TMI 915X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... concealed its income. The decision from Hon’ble Apex Court in Reliance Petro Products Ltd. (2010 (3) TMI 80 - SUPREME COURT ), holding that mere making a wrong claim itself does not tantamount to furnishing inaccurate particulars or concealing of income, clearly comes to the rescue of the assessee. Respectfully, following the same, the penalty of ₹ 17,496/- imposed u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as contended that the parties were absconding, therefore, at best, it should have been allowed as business loss. On the other hand, the ld. DR, Shri Randhir Gupta, defended imposition as well as confirmation of penalty. 2.1. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The facts, in brief, are that the assessee claimed deduction as bad debts u/s 36(2) o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessee, do not qualify to be treated as bad debt, hence, he disallowed the same. It is not the case that the assessee hides something. Even if, it is presumed that a wrong claim was made, still, it cannot be concluded that the assessee furnished inaccurate particulars or concealed its income. The decision from Hon ble Apex Court in Reliance Petro Products Ltd. (322 ITR 158) (SC), holding that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
