TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 865X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... outcome of the order to be passed on the quantum additions in accordance with the directions given in aforesaid referred to order [2016 (8) TMI 821 - ITAT DELHI] - ITA No. 4833/Del/2015 And ITA No. 5170/Del/2015 - - - Dated:- 7-2-2018 - Sh. N. K. Saini, AM And Sh. K. N. Chary, JM For The Assessee : Sh. Sachit Jolly, Adv. For The Revenue : Sh. Kumar Pranav, Sr. DR ORDER Per N. K. Saini, AM: These cross appeals by the assessee and department are directed against the order dated 27.05.2015 of ld. CIT(A)-6, Delhi. 2. The grounds raised in the assessee s appeal read as under: 1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax [Ld.CIT(A)] erred in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) is justified in deleting the penalty of Rs,6,80,11,186/- imposed by the Assessing Officer (AO) u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act without considering provisions of Explanation 1 to section 271(l)(c) of the Act? 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) is justified in deleting the penalty imposed by the AO u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act without considering that the assessee had made a claim which is incorrect in law and the explanation of the assessee is neither substantiated nor shown to be bonafide? 3. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) is justified in deleting the penalty ignoring ration decidendi as laid down by Ho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... addition made on issue no. (ii), ( iii) Uphold the addition of AO/TPO on issue no. (iii), ( iv) Directed the AO to verify the b/f losses and unabsorbed depreciation from the records and give set off of such losses. 6. The AO asked the assessee to show cause as to why penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act should not be levied, since there was no response from the assessee s side. The AO completed the penalty proceedings ex-parte and levied the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. The AO held that the assessee had concealed and also furnished inaccurate particulars of its income in respect of disallowance of ESOP expenses of ₹ 21,28,41,993/- and addition of ₹ 94,16,785/- on account of disallowance as per TP adjustme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ant findings are given in para 13 of the aforesaid referred to order dated 17.08.2016 which read as under: 13. In any event, in view of the decision of the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Biocon Ltd. which is binding on us this issue is set aside to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. The AO for the A.Y. 2008-09 in an order passed u/s 250/143(3) of the Act on 14.09.2015, on the directions of the ld. CIT(A) and allowed the claim of ESOPs expenditure by following the decision of the Special bench after verification. Hence the issue in this year should also be decided by him afresh. 11. In view of the above, we do not see any merit in the appeal of the department. Accordingly, we confirm the vie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
