9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (2) TMI 448X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... COURT) has been rightly relied upon by the ld CIT(A) and therefore no penalty is leviable. Moreover, it has been brought to our notice that the quantum appeal preferred by the Department against the assessee for the relevant assessment year has been dismissed and the appeal of the assessee has been allowed by the Tribunal vide order dated 14.3.2014. Therefore, in such circumstances we are inclined not to interfere in the order of the ld. CIT(A) and we confirm the same and dismiss the appeal of the revenue. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No. 3120/Del/2013 - - - Dated:- 29-8-2014 - SHRI B.C.MEENA AND SHRI A. T. VARKEY, JJ. For the Appellant by : Gauran Makhijani, Ca For the Respondent by : Gunjan Prasad, CIT DR OR ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e parent company and to augment the National Energy Security of India. 4. Return declaring loss of ₹ 4,59,91,46,670/- was filed on 27.11.2003. Assessment u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (herein after the Act) was made on 07.02.2006 at loss of ₹ 1,59,29,80,200/- after making disallowance on account of depreciation inadmissible amounting to ₹ 2,93,79,78,401/- and disallowance on account of expenditure relating to project pending final evaluation/ approval written off amounting to ₹ 6,81,88,072/-. 5. However as a result of the order of the CIT(A) in quantum proceedings, addition made by the AO to the tune of ₹ 292,33,06,725/- in respect Sakhalin project, and ₹ 1,46,71,676/- in respect of Myanmar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eclaring loss of ₹ 4,59,91,46,671/- under the normal provisions of the Act and Book Profit under section 115JB of the Act at ₹ 3,23,31,235/- and paid taxes on Book Profit. The assessment under section 143 (3) of the Act was completed by the A.O. on 07/02/2006 wherein various additions/disallowances amounting to ₹ 3,00,61,66,473/- was made to the returned loss under normal provisions of the Act and the appellant company was assessed at loss of ₹ 1,59,29,80,200/- under the normal provisions of the Act and book profit at ₹ 3,23,31,235/- u/s 115JB of the Act. Additions/disallowances were made by the AO under the normal provision of the Act on the following issues: Disallowance of depreciation on Participating ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was at ₹ 3,23,3 I,235/- at the book profit shown by the appellant in the return of income filed on 27/11/2003. In view thereof, in conclusion, the assessment order records as follows:- Assessed at income taxable u/s 115JB at ₹ 3,23,31,235/- as assessed income is less than the income declared u/s 115JB of the IT. Act. Charge interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C as per the LT. Act. Issue necessary forms. Penalty proceedings under section 27 (1)( c) are being initiated separately for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income and concealment of income, The income of the assessee was thus assessed under section 115JB and not under the normal provision . Considering the additions/disallowance confirmed by ld. CIT(A) the A.O. he ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on of tax and all logical consequences following thereon. 4.5 When the tax was imposed and calculated under the Act on the deemed income under section 115JB of the Act, for the purposes of the imposition of penalty the A.O could not revert back to the normal income as it would lead to an absurd situation of two different incomes of the same person for the same assessment year. Furthermore, when the income-tax is paid on the 'book profits' by a legal fiction, such legal fiction has to be taken to its logical conclusion. 4.6 The furnishing of inaccurate particulars had its repercussions only when the assessment was done under the normal procedure. The assessment as per the normal procedure was, however. not acted upon. On the co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (2012) 22 Taxman.com 155(Mum). Therefore, I am of the considered opinion that the penalty u/s 27I(l)(c) imposed by the A.O. cannot be sustained and as such the same is deleted. 9. From the aforesaid it is evident that income of the assessee was finally assessed u/s 115JB of the Act and not under the normal provision of the Act. The addition made by the AO in the order were confirmed to the income determined under the normal provision of the Act and not in respect of the Books profits u/s 115JB of the Act. It is not the case of the Revenue that the assessee has concealed any particulars or furnished any inaccurate particulars while computing the book profit u/s 115JB. In such circumstances the ratio of Hon ble Delhi High court in Nalwas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
