TMI Blog2016 (8) TMI 912X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er, as there was substantial loss, there was no tax benefit to the assessee. The said explanation has not been shown to be false or malafide and all the relevant facts for computation of income have been disclosed by the appellant in the return of income. The same analogy and finding will apply in respect of contribution to the gratuity fund. We hereby confirm the findings of the ld CIT(A) deleting the penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA Nos. 861/JP/2013 - - - Dated:- 20-7-2016 - SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM AND SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM For The Assessee : Shri Gaurav Sharma (CA) For The Revenue : Smt Roshanta Meena (JCIT) ORDER PER SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M. This ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d by the ld. CIT(A) while the said claim has been disallowed by Hon ble ITAT holding that co-operative banks are not scheduled or non scheduled banks. It has been held in the case of CIT vs. Harshvardhan Chemicals Minerals Ltd. 259 ITR 212 (Raj.) that assessee having claimed some deduction which are debatable, it could not be said that it has concealed any income or furnished inaccurate particulars of income and penalty under sec. 271(1)(c) could not be levied. In this context, it may be mentioned that there are no two opinions about the settled position of law that regular assessment proceedings and penalty proceedings are two entirely different subjects with operate in distinct and separate fields so much so that entirely differen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on for the claim made regarding gratuity. The assessee has disclosed the amount of Provision for gratuity in its profit and loss account and assessee has claimed the said deduction. However, though it is genuine liability, the disallowance was made due to technical reason as the said fund was not approved gratuity fund. The assessee has disclosed all the material facts necessary for computation of income. It is not the case that expenditure has been camouflaged or bogus expenses have been claimed. 2.2 At the outset, the ld AR submitted that the assessee cooperative bank is continuously running in losses and loss return of ₹ 11,00,81,191/-was filed by the assessee and even after considering the disallowances as made by the AO, it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sued the material available on record. In the instant case, the penalty has been levied for claiming deduction u/s 36(1)(viia) of the Act. The AO has relied solely on the decision of the Coordinate Bench in the quantum proceedings and stated that in view of the decision of Hon ble ITAT, he was satisfied that assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of income and concealed the tax, therefore it is liable for penal action u/s 271(1)(c) of the IT Act for A.Y. 2007-08. However, the ld CIT(A) has given a categorical finding that it has not been shown how by making the claim in respect of Provision for bad and doubtful debts, the assessee has concealed or furnished inaccurate particulars of income. The appellant has explained that the claim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
