9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (3) TMI 534X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ar referred above, the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) is not leviable in respect of the additions made while computing the income under the normal provisions of Act. In view of the above, we set aside the order of ld. CIT(A) and direct the AO to delete the penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) for the year under consideration. - Decided in favour of assessee - ITA No.980/Mum/2006 - - - Dated:- 8-1-2016 - B. R. Baskaran, AM And Amarjit Singh, JM For the Appellant : Shri Vijay C Kothari For the Respondent : Shri K Krishna Murty ORDER Per B. R. Baskaran, AM The appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 17.11.2005 passed by the ld. CIT(A), Central-I, Mumbai for the assessment year 2001-02 confirming the p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... enalty u/s 271(1)(c) should not be imposed with reference to the above addition/disallowance made under the normal provisions. Accordingly, he submitted that the impugned penalty confirmed by the ld.CIT(A) is liable to be cancelled. 5. On the contrary, the ld. DR placed strong reliance on the order passed by the ld. CIT(A). 6. We heard the rival contentions of the parties and perused the record. We notice that the CBDT has recently issued a circular No.25/2015 dated 31.12.2015, wherein the CBDT has accepted the decision rendered by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Nalwa Sons Investments Ltd (supra). For the sake of convenience, we extract below the CBDT circular No.25/2015 dated 31.12.2015: CIRCULAR NO. 25/2015 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... provisions. The judgment has attained finality. 4. Subsequently, the provisions of Explanation 4 to sub-section (1) of section 271 of the Act have been substituted by Finance Act, 2015, which provide for the method of calculating the amount of tax sought to be evaded for situations even where the income determined under the general provisions is less than the income declared for the purpose of MAT u/s 115JB of the Act. The substituted Explanation 4 is applicable prospectively w.e.f. 01.04.2016. 5. Accordingly, in view of the Delhi High Court judgment and substitution of Explanation 4 of section 271 of the Act with prospective effect, it is now a settled position that prior to 1/4/2016, where the income tax payable on the total i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5JB of the Act by following the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court (referred above), we find merit in the contentions of the assessee. As submitted by the ld. AR after passing the Tribunal order dated 30.9.2015 (referred above), the total income is a negative figure under normal provisions of the Act. Hence the income declared by the assessee u/s 115JB of the Act shall remain total income of the assessee. In view of the circular referred above, the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) is not leviable in respect of the additions made while computing the income under the normal provisions of Act. In view of the above, we set aside the order of ld. CIT(A) and direct the AO to delete the penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) for the year under consider ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
