TMI Blog2018 (6) TMI 421X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ve to be read strictly before the penalty provisions under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act can be invoked. In the present facts, the Revenue has not been able to show even remotely that there is any concealment of income or filing of inaccurate particulars of income. - Decided in favour of assessee. - INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 1363 OF 2015 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 1358 OF 2015 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 1359 OF 2015 - - - Dated:- 4-6-2018 - M. S. Sanklecha And Sandeep K. Shinde, JJ. Mr. Suresh Kumar for the appellant Mr. Niraj Sheth i/b Atul Jasani for the respondent ORDER P.C. 1. These three Appeals under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) challenge the common order dated 19th March, 2015 passed by the Income Tax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the meantime, pending disposal of the quantum appeal by the Tribunal, the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax imposed penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act by three separate orders all dated 29th March, 2011 in respect of the Assessment Years 199596, 199697 and 199798. This by following the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Zoom Communication Pvt. Ltd. 371 ITR 570. Finally, the Tribunal by the impugned order dated 19th March, 2015 allowed the respondent's appeals in penalty proceedings. This by holding that on merits it had by its order dated 30th April, 2014 in quantum proceedings for all the three years, held that the respondent assessee is entitled to the claim of depreciation on its as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d upon Mr. Suresh Kumar, learned Counsel appearing for the Revenue to show us a finding by the Authorities under the Act that there has been concealment of particulars of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income on the part of the respondent assessee. In fact, we perused the orders of the Assessing Officer imposing penalty as well as the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] upholding the penalty and also the impugned order of the Tribunal. In none of these orders there is any whisper of the alleged particulars of income which has been concealed or what particulars of income which have been filed is inaccurate. Mere using the words that there has concealment of income and / or furnishing inaccurate particul ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at it is not the case of the revenue in the absence of particularization that the basis of the claim was by suppression / concealment of income or filing of inaccurate particulars of income. Once suppression or filing of inaccurate particulars is absent, no penalty is imposable only for making a claim not acceptable to the Revenue. 9. Further, reliance by the impugned order dated 19th March, 2015 upon the decision of the Delhi High Court in Zoom Communication Pvt. Ltd. (supra) is based on the fact that the claim made by the assessee therein was without any foundation. Further, in the above case, it was pointed that it was apparent that the respondent therein was not acting bona fide while making claim for deduction. Moreover, the same ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
