9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (4) TMI 59X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... first disallowance under Section 14A is concerned, the reasoning of the CIT (A) (endorsed by the ITAT that the position in law was in a state of flux and the benefit of doubt could be given to the assessee), is sound. With respect to the disallowance under Section 37 (1), here too, we notice that the CIT (A) had granted relief but that order was set aside by the ITAT. Having regard to these peculi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nalty in the circumstances of the case was justified. The Assessing Officer had imposed penalty on two counts, i.e., not offering any amount under Section 14A as well as disallowance under first explanation to Section 37 (1) of expenditure in the nature of penalty paid to the Delhi Development Authority ( DDA ) upon a composition. The record would show that so far as the first disallowance unde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that noting fully well the Explanation to Section 37 (1), the expenditure could not have been claimed, which was by deliberation and, therefore, warranted penalty in the circumstances. Learned counsel relies upon CIT v. Zoom Communications Pvt. Ltd. (2010) 327 ITR 510 (Del.) as well as CIT v. N.G. Technologies 370 ITR 7. The ITAT upheld the CIT (A) s order which had primarily deleted the penalty b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ll the facts in the Tax Audit Report in Form No.3CD under section 44AB of the I.T. Act. Therefore, Ld. CIT (A) has rightly deleted the penalty in dispute, which does not need any interfere on our part. Hence, respectfully following the precedents of the Hon ble Delhi High Court and the Hon ble Supreme Court of India, as aforesaid, we uphold the order of the Ld. CIT (A) wherein the Ld. CIT (A) has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
