TMI Blog2020 (9) TMI 729X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... We find that issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of Sahara India Insurance Company Ltd [ 2019 (8) TMI 409 - DELHI HIGH COURT] as held that penalty is not sustainable if none of the twin charges in notice u/s 274 of the Act are cancelled/ stuck off. On this issue, it is clear that the penalty levied by the ld AO is not sustainable in law. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No. 2362/Del/2019 - - - Dated:- 17-9-2020 - Shri Amit Shukla, Judicial Member And Shri Prashant Maharishi, Accountant Member For the Assessee : Shri Piyush Kaushik, Adv For the Revenue : Ms. Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DR ORDER PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M. 1. This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to ₹ 278024/- levied by the ld AO and confirmed by the ld CIT(A) is sustainable in law or not. 4. The brief facts of the case shows that the assessee filed its return of income for AY 2012-13 on 29.09.2012 declaring total income of ₹ 4515150/-. The assessee company is having a unit in Noida Special Economic Zone and entitled for deduction of 50% of its income u/s 10AA of the Act. The assessee submitted a requisite certificate of a Chartered Accountant for claim made by it u/s 10AA of the Act. During the course of assessment proceedings, it was found that the assessee has derived income of ₹ 899754/- from sale of scrap and refund of sales tax. The assessee claimed deduction u/s 10AA of the Act @50% on the above sum. Ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt certifying the above claim and therefore, claim of the assessee was based on that but found to be non sustainable. Assessee admitted inadvertent error. He relied upon the host of judicial precedents for both these issues. 7. The ld DR also submitted that had the return of the assessee was not selected for scrutiny, the income would have escaped. Therefore, on the merits the penalty is correctly levied. On the issue of technical point raised by the ld AR she submitted that same was not raised before the ld CIT(A), hence cannot be raised here. 8. Both the parties also made lengthy written submissions citing various judicial precedents, which were perused. 9. We have carefully considered the rival contentions and perused the orders ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
