TMI Blog2020 (8) TMI 165X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e attempt made for concealment of particulars of income to levy penalty u/s 271(1)(c). We, further noted that in the case of CIT vs Reliance Petro chemicals products Pvt. Ltd. [ 2010 (3) TMI 80 - SUPREME COURT] has held that making a claim, which is not substantiated cannot be considered as deliberate attempt to concealment of particulars of income, which warrants levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) Similar view has been expressed of CIT vs Price Waterhouse Coopers [ 2012 (9) TMI 775 - SUPREME COURT] where the assessee has made a claim on the basis of tax audit report of auditor and the same has been found to be not allowed and the Ld. AO has made additions - mere making a claim, which is not substantiated that too on the basis of report ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... turn of income for Asst.Year 2007-08 on 28/11/2007, declaring total income at Rs.Nil, after claiming deduction u/s 80IB(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 amounting to ₹ 91,83,987/-. The assessment has been completed u/s 143(3) of the I.T.Act, 1961 on 21/12/2009 and determined total income at ₹ 1,42,48,927/- and in the assessment, the Ld. AO has disallowed the claim of deduction u/s 80IB(4), amounting to ₹ 91,83,987/-. The assessee has carried the matter in appeal before the first appellate authority and the Ld.CIT(A) for the reasons recorded in his appellate order, dated 14/06/2011 has allowed partial relief in respect additions made by the Ld. AO towards disallowances of deduction claimed u/s 80IB(4), in respect of manufactu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the ground that excess claim of deduction arising from export incentive can be considered as bonafied mistake. The relevant findings of the Ld.CIT(A) are as under:- 5.1 I have considered the rival submissions. The submissions made by the AR regarding the wrong claim arising out of inclusion of trading profit in the deduction claimed u/s 80IB(4) of the Act has been considered. Wrong claim of deduction u/s 80IB of the Act on trading income was surrendered only during the remand proceedings, after disallowance was made in the assessment order. Further, the appellant cannot be allowed to use its Auditor as a shield against the imposition of penalty for making wrong claim of deduction in the return that the trading profit is not eligible ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... alty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. In this regard, he relied upon the decision of Hon ble Supreme Court, in the case of CIT s Reliance Petro Products Pvt.Ltd. 322 ITR 158(SC) and CIT vs Price Waterhouse Coopers 348 ITR 306 (SC). 6. The Ld. DR, on the other hand strongly supported order of the Ld.CIT(A) and further submitted that the assessee has made a wrong claim of deduction towards trading profit, even though the law is very clear, in respect of claim of deduction u/s 80IB(4) of the Act, where it is clearly specified that only a manufacturer of goods and articles is eligible for claim of deduction. The Ld.CIT(A) has rightly confirmed penalty levied by the Ld. AO and his order should be upheld. 7. We have heard both the parties, perused ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ar view has been expressed by the Hon ble Supreme Court, in the case of CIT vs Price Waterhouse Coopers (supra), where the assessee has made a claim on the basis of tax audit report of auditor and the same has been found to be not allowed and the Ld. AO has made additions. Under those facts, the Hon ble Supreme Court came to the conclusion that mere making a claim, which is not substantiated that too on the basis of report of auditor cannot be considered as concealment of particulars of income. In this case, there is no doubt of whatsoever with regard to the claim of the assessee towards trading profit and such claim is solely based on the report of auditor in Form No. 10CCB. Therefore, we are of the considered view that the claim made by t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
