9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 1055X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n filed by the Revenue against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-1, Chandigarh dt. 22/03/2018. 2. In the present appeal Revenue has raised the following effective grounds: 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the penalty of Rs. 27,28,890/- on the confirmed addition on account of restricting the benefit of deduction claimed by the assessee under se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s erred in deleting the penalty of Rs. 27,28,890/- on the confirmed addition on account of restricting the benefit of deduction claimed by the assessee under section 80-IC of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to 25% as against 100% deduction without appreciating the decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of UOI vs Dharmendra Textile (306 ITR 277) & Hon'ble P&H High Court in the case of CIT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cided in this penalty proceeding is not whether the AO was right in making the addition. Rather the issue is whether penalty is leviable on the assessee for an incorrect claim. With regard to the correctness of the addition, it is pertinent to bring on record that the said addition has been confirmed in the favour of the department by the Ld. CIT(Appeals) as well as the Hon'ble TTAT in the cas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6. We have heard arguments of both the parties. The issue of allowability of deduction under section 80IC on substantial expansion had a long history of oscillations gone through various Judicial Authorities. The deduction was allowed and also disallowed by the Revenue at different times and the additions made were confirmed at appellate levels and were deleted by the orders of the Hon'ble High C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
