9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
- Appeal against deletion of penalty under section 271(1)(c) amounting to Rs. 19,55,449 for the assessment year 1983-84. Analysis: 1. The assessee filed a return of income disclosing a loss, but the assessed income was higher due to certain adjustments made by the Assessing Officer (AO). The penalty was levied on the grounds of concealing income related to royalty provision and excise duty claims. 2. The CIT(A) found that the assessee had provided all relevant details during assessment proceedings and had a bona fide explanation for the disputed items. The CIT(A) referred to legal opinions and case laws to support the assessee's claim for exemption, ultimately deleting the penalty. 3. In the appeal, the Departmental Representative argued that the assessee misrepresented facts and should be penalized. Various case laws were cited to support this argument. The representative emphasized that the assessee treated certain provisions as income in the books but claimed them as non-taxable. 4. The assessee's counsel reiterated that all details were disclosed to the AO, including legal opinions and explanations for the disputed items. The counsel cited relevant case laws and provisions to argue against the penalty under section 271(1)(c). 5. The Tribunal analyzed the submissions and evidence. It concluded that the assessee did not conceal income or provide inaccurate particulars while filing the return. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of supplementary statements with the return form and endorsed the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the penalty. The Tribunal criticized the AO for a routine and mechanical imposition of the penalty without a judicious approach. 6. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the penalty and dismissed the appeal.
|
