Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2015 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (2) TMI 623 - ITAT DELHIPenalty u/s. 271(1)(c) - showing exaggerated claim of deduction u/s. 80IB - Held that:- Assessee has sufficient own funds available which can be stated to have been utilised towards the credit needs of Slivassa unit. We find that when the assessee has both interest free and interest bearing funds available it is the prerogative of the assessee to allocate the funds towards specific activities which suits him. In this view of the matter also it cannot be said that assessee has made any ex-facie bogus claim. Assessee can also not be stated to have furnished inaccurate particulars or made any concealment. In these circumstances, in our considered opinion, assessee should not be visited with the rigors of penalty u/s. 271(1)(c). In order to expose the assessee to penalty, unless the case is strictly covered by the provision, the penalty provision cannot be invoked. By no stretch of imagination can making an incorrect claim tantamount to furnishing inaccurate particulars. See CIT vs. Reliance Petroproducts Pvt. Ltd.[2010 (3) TMI 80 - SUPREME COURT ] and CIT vs Dharampal Prem Chand [2010 (9) TMI 155 - DELHI HIGH COURT] - Decided in favour of assessee.
|