9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (4) TMI 121 - AT - Income TaxPenalty under section 271(1)(c) - assessee claimed deduction under section 80IB(10) - Held that - the assessee is entitled to the claim of deduction under section 80IB(10) of the Act on completed portion of building from year to year, if the assessee fulfills the requirement of completing the building by stipulated date i.e. 31.03.2008. Admittedly, in the facts of the present case, the assessee had completed the building before 31.03.2008 and even applied for completion certificate on 29.03.2008 after receiving the requisite No Objection Certificates from various departments and also the completion certificate issued by the Architect. In the above said facts and circumstances, where the assessee has furnished complete details in respect of its claim of deduction under section 80IB(10) of the Act and merely because the same was denied to the assessee on some premise, which does not hold good in today s scenario of settled position of law.We find no merit in the order levying penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act in this regard. The facts in ACIT Vs. M/s. Rohan Engineering Construction (supra) are identical to the facts before us, where the assessee was not able to obtain the completion certificate by the appointed date and the deduction under section 80IB(10) of the Act was denied and it was held by the Tribunal that the assessee is not liable for levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. Following the same parity of reasoning, we reverse the order of CIT(A) and direct the Assessing Officer to delete penalty under section 271(1)(c) - Decided in favour of assessee
Issues Involved:
1. Validity of penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for assessment years 2005-06 to 2007-08. 2. Whether the assessee furnished inaccurate particulars of income by claiming deduction under section 80IB(10) of the Act without obtaining the completion certificate by the stipulated date. Detailed Analysis: 1. Validity of Penalty under Section 271(1)(c): The assessee, a builder and promoter, claimed deduction under section 80IB(10) of the Income-tax Act for assessment years 2005-06 to 2007-08. The project named Sankalp Nagari was commenced on 27.03.2003, and the assessee claimed the deduction based on the percentage completion method. However, the Assessing Officer (AO) disallowed the deduction because the completion certificate was not obtained by 31.03.2008, and initiated penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. The CIT(A) upheld the penalty, noting that the amendment effective from 01.04.2005 required the completion certificate to be obtained by 31.03.2008. The CIT(A) held that the failure to obtain the certificate by this date justified the penalty, as the assessee furnished inaccurate particulars of income. However, the CIT(A) dropped the penalty for assessment year 2004-05, as the amendment was not applicable for that year. 2. Furnishing Inaccurate Particulars of Income: The assessee argued that it had completed the construction before the stipulated date and applied for the completion certificate on 29.03.2008, enclosing all necessary No Objection Certificates (NOCs). The assessee contended that all required documents were submitted, and the delay in obtaining the completion certificate was beyond its control. The assessee relied on various judicial precedents to assert that the deduction should be allowed on a proportionate basis for completed units, even if the project was not fully completed by the stipulated date. The Tribunal examined the facts and held that the assessee had furnished complete details regarding its claim under section 80IB(10), and the denial of the deduction was based on a premise that did not hold in the context of settled legal positions. The Tribunal noted that the assessee had a bonafide belief in its entitlement to the deduction and had completed the project within the stipulated timeframe, applying for the completion certificate timely. Conclusion: The Tribunal found no merit in the penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) and reversed the CIT(A)'s order. The Tribunal directed the AO to delete the penalty for all the assessment years in question, aligning with previous decisions where similar claims were allowed, and penalties were not justified. Order Pronouncement: All the appeals of the assessee were allowed, and the order was pronounced on 17th February 2016.
|
