9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (8) TMI 421X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t could not be said that the assessee had filed inaccurate particulars - Decided against Revenue. - ITA No. 97 of 2014 (O&M) - - - Dated:- 7-7-2014 - Ajay Kumar Mittal And Jaspal Singh,JJ. For the Appellant : Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Advocate ORDER Ajay Kumar Mittal,J. 1. This appeal has been preferred by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act ) against the order dated 2.8.2013, Annexure A.4, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, B (in short, the Tribunal ) in ITA No.386/Chd/2013 for the assessment year 2008-09, claiming following substantial questions of law:- i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon ble ITAT i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the provisions of section 43B of the Act. Penalty proceedings under section 271 (1) (c) of the Act were also initiated. The assessee did not go in appeal against the assessment framed thereby accepting the fact that wrong claim had been made by it knowingly. The Assessing Officer imposed a penalty amounting to ₹ 14,59,398/- vide order dated 27.6.2011 in respect of addition made under section 43B on account of unpaid leave encashment and gratuity. Not satisfied with the order, the assessee filed appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)]. Vide order dated 24.1.2013, Annexure A.3, the CIT(A) deleted the penalty by observing that the assessee society was functioning under the overall control of Ministry of Human Re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... noticed in its order dated 24.1.2013, Annexure A.3 as under:- I have considered the submission of the learned counsel and have gone through the facts of the case. The appellant society is functioning under overall control of Ministry of Human Resource Development and major decisions are taken under the supervision of Government of India or officials appointed by the Government of India. The appellant society had filed a return declaring loss of more than ₹ 1.91 crores. The amounts relating to leave encashment and gratuity had been claimed as deduction by the appellant whereas these were not paid and so these were disallowed under section 43B of the Act. Concealment penalty has also been levied. As the appellant was a Government o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee. Secondly the assessee must have furnished inaccurate particulars of his income. The meaning of the words particulars used in Section 271(1) (c) would embrace the details of the claim made. Where no information given in the return is found to be incorrect or inaccurate, the assessee cannot be held guilty of furnishing inaccurate particulars. In order to expose the assessee to penalty, unless the case is strictly covered by the provision, the penalty provision cannot be invoked. By no stretch of imagination can making an incorrect claim tantamount to furnishing inaccurate particulars. There can be no dispute that everything would depend upon the return filed by the assessee because that is the only document where the assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
