9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 257X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nder section 271(1) (c) of the Act. Under the circumstances and considering the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Tips Industries P. Ltd. (2010 (1) TMI 50 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT ) when the learned tribunal has deleted penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act, it cannot be said that the learned tribunal has committed any error. No substantial question of law arise. - Decided in fa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r section 271(1)(c) ? 2.00. Facts leading to the present appeal in nutshell are as under :- 2.01. That the assessee filed return of income for A.Y. 2005-06 and claimed weighted deduction on purchase of motor vehicles for employees. In the scrutiny assessment under section 143(3) of the Act, the returned income of ₹ 12,79,35,253/- was assessed at ₹ 15,20,85,816/-. While passing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... deduction on purchase of motor vehicles for employees. That on the aforesaid addition of ₹ 82,99,000/-, A.O. levied penalty made under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. In the appeal preferred before the learned CIT(A), the learned CIT(A) allowed the appeal preferred by the assessee and deleted penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act which was levied on addition of ₹ 82,99,000/-. The re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... perused and considered the order passed by the A.O. imposing penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. We have also considered the order passed by the learned CIT(A) as well as the learned ITAT imposing penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. It is not in dispute that the A.O. levied penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act on the addition of ₹ 82,99,000/- which was claimed by the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
