2012 (3) TMI 493 - AT - Income Tax

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Held that - No justification to interfere in the order of the learned CIT(A) deleting the penalty in the matter in the absence of any material produced by the learned DR to controvert the same. We confirm his findings. - Decided against revenue.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge against deletion of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the IT Act for assessment year 2006-07 due to disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) and disallowance of other expenses.

Analysis:
1. The appeal was filed by the Revenue against the order of the CIT(A) for assessment year 2006-07, challenging the deletion of penalty of &8377; 1,97,55,306/- imposed by the AO under section 271(1)(c) of the IT Act. The penalty was related to disallowances made under section 40(a)(ia) and other expenses. The CIT(A) directed the AO to delete the penalty concerning the disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) as there was no concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. The CIT(A) also directed the AO to delete the penalty related to disallowance of other expenses made on an estimate basis.

2. The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s decision. The Tribunal considered the arguments of both parties. The AR for the assessee cited precedents where similar issues were decided in favor of the assessee. The Tribunal noted that the disallowance of expenses due to non-payment of TDS in time was technical and did not amount to concealment of income. Additionally, the disallowance of expenses made on an estimate basis did not attract a penalty. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had rightly deleted the penalty and the Revenue failed to provide any material to challenge the CIT(A)'s findings.

3. The Tribunal referenced another case where similar issues were decided in favor of the assessee. The Tribunal reiterated that mere disallowance of expenses due to non-deduction of TDS does not constitute furnishing inaccurate particulars of income or concealment of income. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the penalty, as there was no evidence of inaccurate particulars of income furnished by the assessee. The Revenue's appeal was dismissed.

4. Based on the above discussions and precedents, the Tribunal confirmed the CIT(A)'s findings and dismissed the Revenue's appeal. The Tribunal found no merit in the Revenue's challenge against the deletion of the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the IT Act. The appeal of the Revenue was ultimately dismissed, upholding the decision of the CIT(A) regarding the deletion of the penalty.