TMI Blog2014 (11) TMI 1175X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... could not be substantiated in law. Hence, the decision rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Reliance Petro Products (P) Ltd [2010 (3) TMI 80 - SUPREME COURT] shall squarely apply to this claim. In respect of Project expenses, the question whether it was capital expenditure or revenue expenditure is, as submitted by Ld A.R, is a debatable question. It is well settled principle that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erused the record. We notice that the assessing officer has levied penalty for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income in respect of the following additions:- (a) Provision for leave encashment - ₹ 7,96,156/- (b) Project expenses - ₹ 7,32,240/-. It is pertinent to note that the assessee had accepted the addition of above said two items in the quantum assessment proceedi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y claim, which could not be substantiated in law, will not lead to a case of furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. He further submitted that the question whether the Project expenses incurred by the assessee was Capital or revenue in nature is a debatable issue. Accordingly he submitted that the Ld CIT(A) was not justified in confirming the penalty. However, the Ld D.R placed strong reli ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
