9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 1311X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Act. - Decided in favour of assessee - Tax Appeal No. 996 of 2017 - - - Dated:- 24-1-2018 - Ms. HARSHA DEVANI AND MR. A. S. SUPEHIA, JJ. For The Appellant : MRS MAUNA M BHATT, ADVOCATE For The Opponent : MR.ANKIT M TALSANIA, ADVOCATE ORAL ORDER ( PER : HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI) 1. By this appeal under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ), the appellant revenue has challenged the order dated 25.1.2017 made by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad B Bench, Ahmedabad (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal ) in ITA No.1188/ Ahd/ 2014, by proposing the following question stated to be a substantial question of law: Whether the Appellate Tr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the assessee had an STPI Certificate from 18.2.2009, the assessee would be entitled to deduction under section 10B of the Act for forty two days only and not for the entire financial year. It was urged that having regard to the facts of the case, the Tribunal was not justified in confirming the deletion of penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. 4. The facts as emerging from the record reveal that during the course of scrutiny, the assessee had informed the Assessing Officer that it was not registered with STPI, which was mandatory for claiming deduction. Consequently, the Assessing Officer had disallowed the deduction claimed by the assessee. However, the assessee subsequently found that it was registered with STPI with eff ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing receipt of export proceeds during the course of assessment proceedings. The conditions for claim of deduction under section 10B of the Act had been satisfied and therefore, the claim under section 10B of the Act made in the return of income was a bona fide one. The Commissioner (Appeals) was of the view that considering the totality of the circumstances, a wrong statement had been made before the Assessing Officer by the chartered accountant that there was no certificate of registration with STPI. The assessee had earned all its income through software exports and the proceeds had been realised in foreign exchange after following due procedure. All the details regarding receipt of foreign exchange were also furnished at the time of asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... attract the penalty under Section 271(1)(c). If we accept the contention of the Revenue then in case of every return where the claim made is not accepted by the assessing officer for any reason, the assessee will invite penalty under Section 271(1)(c). That is clearly not the intendment of the legislature. Viewed in the light of the above decision, the Commissioner (Appeals) has categorically found that there was no concealment of facts by the assessee, to which the Tribunal has concurred. The assessee made a bona fide claim which was not accepted by the revenue. Therefore, in the absence of any concealment, merely because the assessee had made a claim under section 10B of the Act, the same would not attract penalty under section 271 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
