9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (7) TMI 619X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion 271(1)(c). The assertion of the Assessee that it was not served with a notice and therefore cannot be blamed for not filing a reply, has gone uncontroverted. This being the position we do not find any perversity with the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Tribunal in deleting the penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer. In any case this is a possible view of the matter upon appreciating the evidence. In the circumstances, both the grounds urged by the Revenue cannot be termed as substantial questions of law. - Decided against revenue. - Income Tax Appeal No. 1396 of 2013 - - - Dated:- 6-7-2015 - M. S. Sanklecha And N. M. Jamdar,JJ. For the Appellant : Mr P C Chhotaray For the Respondent : Mr Atul Jasani O ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oner. The levy of penalty was challenged on the ground that Assessee had no malafide intention to evade any tax and all the facts and details were placed on record. The Commissioner by the order dated 10 June 2011 allowed the appeal. The Commissioner came to the conclusion that merely because the claim made by an Assessee was disallowed, penalty cannot be levied, unless it is demonstrated that the Assessee had any malafide intention. 4. The Revenue thereafter filed an appeal to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal accepted the reasoning of the Commissioner that the penalty cannot be levied merely because the claim of the Assessee is found to be incorrect. The Commissioner and the Tribunal relied upon the decision of the Apex C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... whether on facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Tribunal was justified in upholding the order of Commissioner (Appeals) deleting the penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer, and secondly : whether the Tribunal was right in law in deleting the penalty and upholding the order of the Commissioner of IncomeTax ignoring that Assessee had wilfully claimed deductions in respect of interest on borrowed funds which were diverted to sister concern and not for the business. 7. Mr.Atul Jasani, learned counsel for the Respondent Assessee submitted that no notice was issued to the Assessee before imposing the penalty and this ground was taken by the Assessee in the appeal. He submitted that, both the Assessee and it's sister concer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the provision are diluted. Whether a particular person has concealed income or has deliberately furnished inaccurate particulars, would depend on facts of each case. In the present case we are concerned only with the finding that there has been no concealment and furnishing of incorrect particulars by the present assessee. 10. Though the Assessee had given interest free advances to it's sister concerns and that it was disallowed by the Assessing Officer, the Assessee had challenged the same by instituting the proceedings which were taken up to the Tribunal. The Tribunal had set aside the order of the Assessing Officer and restored the same back to the Assessing Officer. Therefore, the interpretation placed by Assessee on the provis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
