TMI Blog2017 (2) TMI 1197X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... claimed under the said provisions for the three assessment years i.e. 2006-07, 2009-10 and 2010-11, the claim for deduction in the year 2010-11, being the 9th or the 10 year, could be claimed. Both the authorities have concurrently found that claiming the deduction under Section 10A of the Act by the assesses was a bonafide mistake and the assessee had not concealed any material facts as the assessee had clearly pointed out the date of commencement of the production in Form No. 56F, as 01.06.1999. The authorities had found that since the mistake committed by the assessee was brought to the assessee's notice, the assessee unconditionally withdrew the said claim and offered the said amount as income of the relevant year and paid the tax on th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essing Officer found that the assessee was not entitled to the benefit of Section 10A of the Income Tax Act in the 11th year of production. After noticing the mistake in respect of the claim for deduction, the assessee offered the aforesaid amount as income and paid the tax on the same. The assessee unconditionally had withdrawn the said claim and had claimed that the mistake was inadvertent. According to the assessee, in these circumstances, Assessing Officer could not have levied the penalty of ₹ 42,00,000/on the assessee under Section 271 (1) (c) of the Act. After the Assessing Officer passed the order levying penalty, the assessee challenged the said order before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The Commissioner of Inco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erence with the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, in this appeal. For the assessment year under consideration, the assessee had shown the date of commencement of production in Form 56F, as 01.06.1999. The assessee had not concealed the date of production or had not made any mistake in pointing out the same. The authorities, therefore, rightly held that the assessee had not concealed anything and not stated any incorrect particulars of income in the years under consideration. The assessee had claimed the benefit under Section 10A of the Act under a bona fide belief that since the deduction was not claimed under the said provisions for the three assessment years i.e. 2006-07, 2009-10 and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
