9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (2) TMI 881X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wed being not relatable to the business of the assessee company - Merely because an expenditure has been disallowed in the hands of the assessee does not automatically make the assessee exigible to levy of penalty under s. 271(1)(c) of the Act - Held that:- no merit in the levy of penalty on disallowance of expenses holding the same to be non-business expenses, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. 20 lakhs was imposed though the minimum penalty leviable was Rs. 14,64,990. The CIT(A), in the appeal against penalty levied under s. 271(1)(c) of the Act deleted the penalty on both the accounts i.e., disallowance of foreign tour expenses and recomputation of deduction under s. 80HHC of the Act. The Revenue is aggrieved by the deletion of penalty under s. 271(1)(c) of the Act imposed on accoun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... estimated personal expenses incurred on purchases during foreign tour, wherein also no penalty under s. 271(1)(c) of the Act is leviable. 6. Penally under s. 271(1)(c) of the Act is attracted in case the assessee has concealed its income or furnished inaccurate particulars of income. In the facts of the present case before us, the assessee had claimed foreign travel expenses of wife of the direc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... een found to establish that the assessee had either concealed its income or furnished inaccurate particulars of income. We confirm the order of the CIT(A) upholding deletion of penalty under s. 271(1)(c) of the Act on account of disallowance of foreign travelling expenses. Therefore, the ground of appeal raised by the Revenue is dismissed.
7. In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
