9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 1099X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eturn are found to be incorrect or erroneous or false there is no question of inviting the penalty under section 271(1)(c) – Decided against Revenue. - ITA No. 868/Kol/2011 - - - Dated:- 15-2-2013 - Shri P. K. Bansal Shri Mahavir Singh, JJ. For the Appellant: Shri D. K. Rakshit, JCIT, Sr. DR For the Respondent: Shri Sanjay Bajoria, FCA ORDER Per Bench: This appeal by revenue is arising out of order of CIT(A)-VIII, Kolkata in Appeal No. 76/CIT(A)-VIII/Kol/08-09 dated 28.01.2011. Assessment was framed by DCIT, Circle-7, Kolkata u/s. 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ) for Assessment Year 2005-06 vide his order dated 11.12.2007. Penalty in dispute was also levied by DCIT, Cir-7, Kol ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ary to the provisions of law and therefore, liable to be quashed and the penalty order of the A.O. be restored. 3. Brief facts leading to the above issue are that assessment as completed u/s. 143(3) of the Act on 11.12.2007 after disallowing claim of depreciation of Rs.40,39,459/- towards Portal E Commerce. During the scrutiny assessment assessee was asked to explain as to why the claim of depreciation on Portal e-Commerce site would not be disallowed and in reply to the same, assessee replied as under: The cost of Portal E Commerce Site has been treated as Plant Machinery and accordingly the rate of depreciation on Plant Machinery has been charged as per the Income-tax Act, 1961. Internet based business, better known ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n is not a false claim or wrong claim but the AO has not accepted the explanation of assessee and levied penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. Aggrieved, assessee preferred appeal before CIT(A). The CIT(A) noted that the assessee has disclosed the material facts in its return of income in respect to the cost of Portal e-commerce site and there is no concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income by the assessee. He observed in para 4.4 as under: 4.4. It is observed from the perusal of the balance sheet of the assessee for the relevant year that the cost of Portal and e-Commerce Site had been capitalized in the books of account, that is, Portal and e-Commerce Site had been treated as asset by the assessee and the sa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not accurate, not exact or correct ; not according to truth erroneous as an inaccurate statement, copy or transcript. We have already seen the meaning of the word particulars in the earlier part of this judgment. Reading the words in conjunction, they must mean the details supplied in the return, which are not accurate, not exact or correct, not according to truth or erroneous. We must hasten to add here that in this case, there is no finding that any details supplied by the assessee in its return were found to be incorrect or erroneous or false. Such not being the case, there would be no question of inviting the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. A mere making of the claim, which is not sustainable in law, by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
