2017 (12) TMI 851 - AT - Income Tax

Penalty levied on the assessee u/s 271(1)(c) - assessee had willfully furnished wrong particulars of its income, treating its income as exempt u/s 10(23C)(vi) - Held that - AO passed order u/s 154 of the Act, disallowed the assessee s claim, observing that the expense had not been debited to the income and expenditure account, nor any claim was made at the time of assessment; that the expenditure was debited to the Grant in Aid account; and that therefore, there was no mistake apparent from the record. The ld. CIT(A), vide order (APB-28-31) dated 12.10.2012, deleted the disallowance. The Tribunal, vide order (APB 33-35) dated 28.06.2013, upheld this deletion made by the ld. CIT(A). It finds mention in para 2.2 of the impugned order, that the assessee had pointed out before the ld. CIT(A) that the assessee s claim of allowability of salary expenditure of ₹ 18,17520/- had been allowed by the Tribunal. However, the ld. CIT(A) has not dealt with, much less controverted, this assertion of the assessee. Now, once the Tribunal has deleted the disallowance, the very basis for levy of penalty to the extent of the amount of ₹ 18,17,520/- no longer exists. That being so, the penalty qua this amount is also deleted. The AO is requested to provide necessary relief to the assessee accordingly.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Exemption claim under section 10(23C) of the Income Tax Act.
2. Penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act.
3. Claim of salary expenditure and its allowance.

Detailed Analysis:

Issue 1: Exemption claim under section 10(23C) of the Income Tax Act:
The appellant's claim for exemption under section 10(23C) was rejected by the Assessing Officer (AO) as the approval by the Chief Commissioner of Income-tax, Bhopal had not been granted at the time of filing the return. The appellant moved an application under section 154 for rectification, which was allowed resulting in a revised income figure. The appeal against the assessment order was dismissed by the CIT(A).

Issue 2: Penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act:
The penalty was levied by the AO on the grounds of furnishing inaccurate particulars of income, as the appellant claimed exemption without the required approval. The CIT(A) confirmed the penalty, emphasizing that the appellant's conduct of claiming exemption without approval constituted a deliberate act of furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. The appellant's reliance on various judgments was deemed inapplicable to the case.

Issue 3: Claim of salary expenditure and its allowance:
The appellant claimed salary expenditure of a specific amount, which was initially disallowed by the AO but later allowed by the Tribunal. The CIT(A) did not address this claim, leading to the deletion of the penalty related to this amount by the Tribunal.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, deleting the penalty related to the salary expenditure claim. The judgment highlighted the importance of obtaining necessary approvals for claiming exemptions and emphasized the consequences of furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. The detailed analysis of each issue presented a comprehensive understanding of the legal proceedings and outcomes.