TMI Blog2012 (4) TMI 688X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1. The ld.CIT(A) erred in confirming levy of penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act. 3. The learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the penalty has been imposed on the amount disallowed on bad debts. He submitted that the penalty imposed on other disallowance/addition have been deleted by the CIT(A) and the Revenue has not preferred any appeal against the same. Regarding the claim of the bad debts, he submitted that the assessee has disclosed all the material facts at the time of assessment itself and it is a case of honest difference of opinion between the assessee and the Revenue regarding the allowance of certain claim made by the assessee. The learned DR opposed the submissions of the learned counsel for the assessee. He subm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uilty of concealment of income or filing inaccurate particulars of income. In these facts of the case, we hold that it was not a fit case for imposition of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act, which is accordingly cancelled. The Grounds of the assessee s appeal are allowed. ITA No.505/Ahd/2011 (Assessee s appeal) 5. The only ground raised in this appeal of assessee reads as under: 1. The ld.CIT(A) erred in confirming levy of penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act. 6. The learned counsel for the assessee submitted that penalty of ₹ 1,13,046/- was imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act on account of under valuation of the closing stock of raw-material. He submitted that difference in valuation of closing stock on r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the assessee has filed an explanation in this behalf and there is no material to suggest that the explanation of the assessee was not bona fide. In these facts of the case, we hold that it is not a case for levy of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act, which is accordingly cancelled and the ground of the appeal of the assessee is allowed. ITA No.493/Ahd/2010 (Revenue s appeal) 8. The only ground of the Revenue s appeal reads as under: 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ld.CIT(A) has erred in deleting the penalty levied u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act of ₹ 7,44,232 for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income in respect of non-deduction of TDS and not making disallowance in the computation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
