9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (4) TMI 1056X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... araghavan, Advocate For The Respondent : Mr. M.Bhusari, CIT, D.R ORDER PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal is filed by the Assessee is directed against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax(A)-I, Chennai dated 25.02.2014 pertaining to the assessment year 2008-09 . 2.2 The Assessee has raised the grounds with regard to levy of penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act. 2.2. There was a delay of 58 days in filing the appeal. The assessee filed a petition for condonation of delay stating that the person, who is handling appeal papers, i.e. Mr.P.Viswanathan, Manager, Accounts of the Company, suffered from leptospirosis fever and he was not available to take up the case with the assessee s counsel a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the result wrong claim of 80IB, more than the amount eligible by the assessee. The Ld.CIT(A) had gone through the provisions of s.271(1)(c) which read as under: 271. (1) If the Assessing Officer or the Commissioner (Appeals) or the Commissioner in the course of any proceedings under this Act, is satisfied that any person - (a) (b) (c) has concealed the particulars of his income or furnished inaccurate particulars of such income or Explanation 1.-Where in respect of any facts material to the computation of the total income of any person under this Act,- (A) such person fails to offer an explanation or offers an explanation which is found by the Assessing] Officer or the Commissioner (Appeals) or the Commissioner to be fals ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or taxation u/s 11 5JB, but it will definitely have an effect on the Reserves Surpluses of the year and subsequent years. Further, the impact may also accentuate if the appellant offers the income for taxation in the subsequent years under normal computation instead of I I5JB. Therefore, CIT(A) was of the opinion, the glorified Reserves Surpluses in the subsequent years which have arisen out of wrong claim of depreciation and the resultant deduction are not acceptable under the provisions of the law. A wrong claim should not become the base for the business reserves of a company. 3.2 Further the Ld.CIT(A) observed that with regard to Explanation to s.271(1)(c), the appellant has furnished the explanation but it is not satisfactory. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee is in appeal before us. 4. ld.A.R pleaded before us that in view of decision of Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Nalwa Sons Investments Ltd., reported in [2010] 327 ITR 543 wherein held that when the tax payable on income computed under normal procedure is less than tax payable under the deemed provisions of the section 115JB of the Act, then penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act could not be imposed with reference to additions/disallowances made under the normal provisions and for this purpose, he also relied on the Circular of the CBDT Circular No.25/15/ F.No.279/140/2015/ITJ dated 31.12.2015. Further, we come across the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of M/s.Sri Gokulam Hotels India Pvt. Ltd., ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
