9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (5) TMI 234X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee to hide or conceal anything relating to this claim. In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, the Assessing Officer was not justified in imposing penalty. Reliance placed on the decision of Reliance Petro Products P Ltd, reported (2010 (3) TMI 80 - SUPREME COURT ), wherein it is held that mere rejection of any claim would not automatically invite penalty so long as the claim is bonafide and genuine, the rejection of such claim would not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. In the light of above, delete the penalty imposed u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. - Decided in favour of assessee - ITA No. 2949/Ahd/2015 - - - Dated:- 18-2-2016 - Shri George George K., Judicial Member For the Petitioner : ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xplanation vide reply dated 18.11.2013 and 26.05.2014. But, the Assessing Officer rejected the said explanation and levied the penalty. The CIT(A) confirmed the penalty. 4. Aggrieved by the confirmation of penalty by the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal, raising the following grounds:- 1.1 The order passed u/s 250 on 19.08.2015 for AY 2011-12 by CIT(A)-10 Abad upholding the penalty of ₹ 1,62,420/- levied u/s 271(1)(c) by AO is wholly illegal, unlawful and against the principles of natural justice. 1.2 The Ld. CIT(A) has grievously erred in law and or on facts in not considering fully and properly the submissions made and evidence produced by the appellant with regard to the impugned penalty. 2.1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s no attempt on the part of the assessee to hide or conceal anything relating to this claim. In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, the Assessing Officer was not justified in imposing penalty. Reliance is placed on the decision of Reliance Petro Products P Ltd, reported in 322 ITR 158 (SC), wherein it is held that mere rejection of any claim would not automatically invite penalty so long as the claim is bonafide and genuine, the rejection of such claim would not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. In the light of above, I delete the penalty imposed u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the Court on 18th February, 2016 at Ahmedabad. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
