9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 2055X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appeal is by the Revenue, questioning the wisdom of the Tribunal in deleting the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act by raising the following substantial questions of law : "i. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in deleting the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act ? and (ii) Is not the finding of the Tribunal bad by holding ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... its profit and loss account, but it did not add back. 4. The Assessing Officer levied penalty on all the four items upto 100%. The Commissioner (Appeals) confirmed the same. But, the Tribunal ordered deletion of penalty for the reasons stated in paragraph 6 of the order, which reads as follows : "It also emanates that the first one of them falling under Section 94(7) is more or less an error o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd hold that this cannot be held to be an instance of concealment and furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income inviting penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. Therefore, the impugned penalty of Rs. 11,47,552/- is deleted." 5. The Revenue is aggrieved on the ground that to attract penalty under Section 271(1)(c), it is enough for the Department to prove that the assessee was guilty of f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cted above, to come to the conclusion that the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) was liable to be deleted. 7. As a matter of fact, in respect of each of the items in dispute, the Tribunal has given cogent reasons for deleting the penalty. Therefore, with the exercise of such a discretion by the Tribunal in favour of the assessee on the only question of penalty, we do not wish to interfere. Hence, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
