9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (4) TMI 1200X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mpany, which is engaged in the business of share broking as a Member of NSE and CSE. The return of income for the year under consideration was filed by it on 05.10.2005 declaring total income of Rs. 2,49,57,000/-. In the assessment completed under section 143(3) vide an order dated 20.12.2007, additions, inter alia, amounting to Rs. 19,95,000/- and Rs. 8,80,084/- were made by the Assessing Officer to the total income of the assessee under section 94(7) and section 14A of the Act respectively. However, since the tax determined under section 115JB was more than the tax payable by the assesese under the normal provisions of the Act, final tax liability was worked out by the Assessing Officer on the basis of MAT under section 115JB of the Act. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... JB, the ratio of the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Nalwa Sons Investments Limited (supra) was not applicable. He, therefore, proceeded to impose penalty of Rs. 10,52,065/- under section 271(1)(c) in respect of the additions made under section 94(7) and section 14A to the total income of the assessee. 3. The penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) was challenged by the assessee in the appeal filed before the ld. CIT(Appeals). During the course of appellate proceedings before the ld. CIT(Appeals), it was pointed out by the assessee that the additions made to its total income by the Assessing Officer in the assessment completed under section 143(3) read with section 153A were already deleted by the ld. CIT(Appeals) a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o the facts involved in the case of the assessee and we find no infirmity in the impugned order of the ld. CIT(Appeals) cancelling the penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer under section 271(1)(c) by relying on the said decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court. At the time of hearing before us, the ld. D.R. has not been able to bring to our notice any decision of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court or Hon'ble Supreme Court taking a different view than one taken by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Nalwa Sons Investment Limited (supra). We, therefore, uphold the impugned order of the ld. CIT(Appeals) cancelling the penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer under section 271(1)(c) and dismiss this appeal of the Revenue. 5. In t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
