9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (5) TMI 695X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essee is an undertaking of Government of Punjab. No illegality or perversity could be demonstrated by learned counsel for the revenue that the findings of the CIT(A) and the Tribunal were erroneous or perverse in any manner. - Decided against revenue - ITA No. 59 of 2016 (O&M) - - - Dated:- 5-5-2016 - MR. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL AND MR. SHEKHER DHAWAN, JJ. For The Appellant : Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Advocate AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. 1. This appeal has been preferred by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act ) against the order dated 26.10.2015 (Annexure A-4) passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Benches, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal ) in ITA No. 838/CHD ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee claimed expenses for capital gain tax of Rs. 2,65,03,000/- and property tax amounting to Rs. 9588/- in the profit and loss account and had not added them back in the computation of total income. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer vide order dated 28.1.2013 (Annexure A-1) framed the assessment at a total income of Rs. 12,42,58,928/- by making additions of Rs. 2,65,03,000/- on account of capital gain tax and Rs. 9588/- on account of property tax. On both the additions, penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act were also initiated for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. The Assessing Officer vide order dated 19.7.2013 (Annexure A-2) levied penalty amounting to Rs. 61,13,801/- under Section 271(1)(c) of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e mistake of not adding back the impugned amounts in the statement of income was of the then Counsel and moreover, it cannot be said that anyone had benefitted by not adding back the impugned amounts, since the appellant cooperative society is an undertaking of Government of Punjab. The explanation furnished by the appellant is bonafide and so the impugned penalty levied is cancelled. 6. On appeal by the revenue, the Tribunal had affirmed the said findings of the CIT(A) by holding that the assessee had submitted revised computation during the course of assessment proceedings and there was no intention to conceal the income. Further, the Tribunal held that the assessee had duly paid tax on the amounts of capital gains tax and property ta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
