9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 507X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n : Shri Manish J. Shah, A.R. ORDER PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA - AM: The captioned appeal has been filed at the instance of the Revenue against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Vadodara ('CIT(A)' in short), dated 08.05.2015 arising in the penalty order dated 30.07.2014 passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) under S. 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) concerning AY ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was called for hearing, the learned DR for the Revenue relied upon the penalty order passed by the AO on the various disallowances made. 5. The learned AR for the assessee, on the other hand, referred to the assessment order at the outset and submitted that the penalty has been imposed on account of certain additions/disallowances made while computing the taxable income under the normal provisio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as per Section 115JB of the Act remained the same, the penalty imposed under s. 271(1)(c) of the Act was rightly deleted. The learned AR next submitted that Explanation (4) to Section 271(1)(c) has been modified by Finance Act, 2015 and is applicable from AY 2016 17 onwards to cover such situation for imposition of penalty. Such amount is prospective in nature. The learned AR thus contended that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... amendment to the Explanation (4) of Section 271(1)(c) also suggests the purport of the existing provisions as applicable in the relevant assessment year. Therefore, we find merit with the appeal of the assessee. The AO is accordingly directed to delete the penalty imposed under normal provision when the tax liability has been fastened on the assessee under the special provisions of Section 115JB ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
