9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (10) TMI 260X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... DER P.C. 1. By this appeal the appellant Revenue challenges the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 29th April, 2016. The Tribunal by the impugned order allowed the appeal filed by the respondent and set aside the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and directed the Assessing Officer to delete the penalty of Rs. 1,19,31,643/- imposed under Section 271(1)( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 24th December, 2009, disallowed the expenditure of Rs. 3,54,47,542/- claimed towards advertisement and sales promotion on the ground that the expenses would be claimed only in the year the project is completed and income offered to tax. Thus, commenced penalty proceedings. In penalty proceedings, the Assessing Officer held that the respondent assessee was guilty of filing inaccurate particulars ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... deduction of expenses on account of advertisement and sales promotion in the year it was incurred even when the income was offered to tax later under the project completion method of accounting. The Assessing Officer in the Assessment Year 2006-07 for the first time disputed the above method of claiming expenses. The Assessing Officer adopted a methodology to postpone allowability of claim for ded ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e subject Assessment Year and there was no dispute in respect thereof save for the Assessment Year 2006-07 and the subject assessment year. This fact itself would militate against imposition of any penalty upon the respondent on the ground of furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. The Tribunal was, therefore, right in taking note of this fact and the decision of the Supreme Court in the case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
