TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (3) TMI 667
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the present appeals are for A.Y. 2012-13 and 2013- 14, but however the facts of both the cases are identical except for the assessment year and the penalty involved. He therefore submitted that the submissions made by him for arguing appeal for one year would be applicable to the other appeal also. Ld. AR did not object to the aforesaid submissions by Ld. DR. In view of the aforesaid facts we proceed to dispose of both the appeals by consolidated order but however refer to the facts in ITA 806/Del/2022. 2.1. The assessee is a company stated to be engaged in the business of manufacturing of switchgears, electrical goods and bath fittings etc. Assessee had filed a return of income for A.Y. 2012-13declaring total income at Rs. 218,01,71,723/-....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r the normal provisions of the Act is less than the tax payable on the book profit u/s. 115JB of the Act, then penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act, is not attracted with reference to the additions/disallowances made under the normal provisions. He therefore, following the aforesaid circular issued by CBDT, deleted the penalty levied by AO. 3. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the Revenue is now in appeal and has raised the following grounds:- 1. The order of the CIT(Appeals) is erroneous and not tenable in law and on facts. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in fact that after addition, the assessment was completed on normal provision, as the tax payable on normal provision is higher than tax payable on the MAT provision. 3. The Ld. CIT(A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....that CBDT vide circular dated 31.12.2015 has held that where the Income Tax is payable on the basis of book profit u/s. 115JB of the Act, then penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) is not attracted with reference to the additions disallowances made under normal provisions. He thus supported the order of CIT(A). 8. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The issue in the present ground is with respect to the levy of penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) by the AO but deleted by CIT(A). We find that the CIT(A) after considering the submissions of the assessee has given a finding that assessee was subjected to pay taxes u/s. 115JB of the Act, even after taking into consideration all the additions made by the AO in the assessment o....