2012 (5) TMI 614

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sheet filed by the assessee which means that the assessee has disclosed the fact of borrowing in her balance sheet. We agree with the Counsel that assessee had no malafide intention to conceal the fact. So long as assessee has not concealed any material fact or any factual information given by her has not been found to be incorrect, she should not be liable to imposition of penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 8/- from M/s. Third Eye Qualitative Researchers Pvt. Ltd. of which she is a director having substantial interest. Accordingly, the said loan of ₹ 3,57,428/- was added as deemed dividend u/s. 2(22)(e) of the I.T. Act. 4. The matter went up to the stage of ITAT but without any success. Penalty proceedings were initiated and accordingly notices were issued and served upon the assessee. 5. The .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e company was credited to Ms. Ghat's account, thereby resulting the account have a Credit balance. 6. (1972) 83 ITR 26(SC) Hindustan Steel Ltd. It was held that no penalty can be levied if the assessee has acted in bonafide belief that the law was not applicable to him/her. Taking the above submissions into account, it is prayed that the penalty proceedings be dropped." The explanation of the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tended by the Counsel that the assessee acted in a bonafide belief that the law was not applicable to her. The Ld. Counsel further relied on the decision of the ITAT Mumbai 'E' Bench in the case of Sunilchandra Vohra Vs ACIT, Circle 20(3) (2009) 32 SOT 365 wherein on similar facts and circumstances the Tribunal cancelled the penalty levied on the additions made u/s. 22(2)(e) of the Act. 10. The D .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ts of the case, we find that placing reliance by Ld. CIT(A) on the ratio laid down by the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs Atul Mohan Bindal (supra) is misplaced. Considering the facts in totality, we hold that this is not a fit case for levy of penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. The AO is directed to cancel the penalty so levied. 13. In the result, the appeal filed by the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X