9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (4) TMI 542X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for the A.Ys. 2005-06, 2006-07 & 2007-08 respectively in deleting the penalty levied u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. 2. At the outset, Learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that in all these three orders penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act was levied on the additions/disallowance made and most of the additions/disallowance were either deleted or set-aside by the Tribunal and in some cases the Assessing Officer himself did not impose penalty on similar additions made in earlier Assessment Years. Learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that there is no concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars by the assessee in making such claims. Ld. Counsel for the assessee further submitted that considering the facts the Tribunal eit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... alongwith return of income. Issue of allowability of lease premium also referred to and adjudicated by Special Bench of Tribunal (dated 15 February 2007) in case of Mukund Limited. Sun Pharmaceuticals Limited, Gujarat High Court and Lupin Limited, Mumbai Tribunal held in favour of assessee. 2 1(b) 1 Depreciation on residential premises page 5, para 4.2 page 5, para 4.2 page 3, para 3.2 Tribunal held in favour of IL&FS in AY 2004-05 [page 4, para 3.2] and in AYs 2005-06 to 2007-08 [page 9, para 9]. Thereafter, AO allowed depreciation in AY 2004-05 vide order dated 31 December 2018. No penalty levied by AO in AYs 2003-04 and 2004- 05 on identical facts. No appeal filed by Department against CIT(A) order deleting penalty in AY ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... No penalty levied by AO in AYs 2004-05, 2005-06 on identical facts. Deduction under section 10(23G) of the Act reflected separately in computation of income filed alongwith return of income. 1(g) --- Disallowance under section 14A --- page 14, para 10.2 --- Supreme Court in case of Reliance Petroproducts Private Limited held that merely because assessee's claim was not accepted by Revenue, that itself would not attract penalty. Tribunal in AY 2004-05 [page 10, para 6.2] and AYs 2005-07 to 2007-08 [page 14, para 19] set aside matter to AO's file. Tribunal set aside to AO's file for determination of average value of investment and quantum of disallowance of interest and other expense considering SC's dec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sions of the assessee and taking note of the fact that additions/disallowances were either deleted or set aside, he held that there was no concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars by the assessee in making its claims and the penalty was levied on mere change of opinion and the Ld.CIT(A) has rightly deleted the penalty levied for all these three assessment years. We further observed that Assessing Officer levied penalty on the disallowance made u/s. 14A of the Act while computing income under normal provisions of the Act as well as under book profits computation. Penalty cannot attract simply when there is an addition/disallowance is made. There is no concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars in makin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
