Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2015 (3) TMI 62

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 6, the Tribunal deleted the penalty by relying on certain judgments favouring the cancellation of penalty in the absence of recording of proper satisfaction by the AO. The Revenue assailed this order of the tribunal before the Hon'ble Delhi High Court. Vide its judgment dated 16.7.2008, the Hon'ble High Court has remanded the matter to the Tribunal for re-deciding the appeals in the light of the amendment to the Act by introduction of section 271(1B) of the Act. That is how the present appeals have come up before us for consideration and decision. 3. These appeals were fixed for fresh hearing on 22.7.11. There was no response from the assessee. Thereafter, these appeals have been adjourned on several occasions because of non-participation .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n of the i. Buddhist Circuit Project, ii. BWSSB Project and iii. Ajanta Elora Project. The AO observed that the assessee had opened project offices to execute all the above contracts and even its expatriate employees stayed in India for several years for executing such contracts. This, in his opinion, led to the making of its permanent establishment in India. Considering the provisions of section 115A, the AO held that tax @ 30% on the receipts from the above three projects was payable. That is how he sum totaled the receipts from these three contracts at Rs. 5.40 crore and determined tax liability at Rs. 1.62 crore @ 30%. For the assessment year 1998-99 also, a notice u/s 148 was issued on 11.9.03 and the AO computed total income from the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d by the authorities u/s 133A of the Act that the undisclosed income in this case came to light. Rejecting the assessee's contention, the AO imposed penalty in respect of income from Buddhist Circuit and Ajanta Elora projects @ 100% of the tax sought to be evaded for the years in question. No relief was allowed in the first appeal. The assessee is aggrieved against the confirmation of the penalty imposed for these assessment years under consideration. 7. We have heard the ld. DR and perused the relevant material on record. It is noticed that the assessee is a tax resident of Japan. Penalty has been imposed in respect of income from two projects only, namely, Buddhist Circuit and Ajanta Elora. The assessee entered into Agreement with the MO .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... g exemption from tax in respect of the assessee's income and its expatriate staff. Such request was turned down by the CBDT. Thereafter, MOT again took up the matter with the Ministry of Finance for re- consideration of the earlier stand. However, the Finance Minister, vide his communication dated 12.12.01, advised the MOT that in case this is a committed expenditure, then it should be made out of project cost available in the grant to the MOT. Pursuant to the assessments so made, the assessee accepted the tax liability, paid the same and did not choose to prefer any appeal in quantum proceedings. It is, thereafter, that the AO proceeded to levy penalty in respect of income not declared by the assessee from these two projects for which the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... fide error without intending or admitting to either conceal its income or furnish inaccurate particulars. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in CIT vs. Somany Evergree Knits Ltd. (2012) 352 ITR 592 (Bom) has also upheld the deletion of penalty on account of bona fide and inadvertent mistake. 9. Adverting to the facts of the instant case, we find that the act of the assessee in not including income from these two projects in its total income is absolutely bona fide backed by proper Agreement with the Ministry of Tourism, Government of India and does not warrant imposition of any penalty u/s 271(1)(c). It is an altogether a different matter that the MOT, after making commitment to a non-resident assessee, could not seek exemption under the releva .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates