9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (9) TMI 996X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... follows: The assessee a partnership firm was engaged in execution of civil construction works. In respect of the work relatable to the Vikaspuri Project, it had indicated the value of stock and work-in-progress at Rs. 3,61,132. On examination of its 11th and 12th running bills, the AO was of the view that value of the work-in-progress was to be enhanced by Rs. 3,08,401. The assessee agreed for the enhancement of the value of work. Accordingly, the addition was made. Penalty proceedings under s. 271(1)(c) were initiated. The assessee's stand was that it had agreed to the addition on the understanding that for the subsequent assessment year, an equal amount would be given as deduction. It was pointed out that there was no concealment and on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ee was not guilty of any contumacious conduct or any gross or wilful neglect. Accordingly, penalty was cancelled. 3. Learned counsel for the Revenue submitted that the return for the year 198990 was submitted after the detection of the discrepancy during the course of assessment proceedings for the preceding year, i.e., 1988-89. Therefore, the filing of the return indicating the figures for the subsequent accounting year was of no consequence. Learned counsel for the assessee, on the other hand, submitted that there was no difference in tax effect as the rate of tax was the same for both the years. Accordingly, the assessee had agreed to the addition. Mere concession to make an addition does not per se lead to an inference of guilt or acce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... addition of Rs. 3,08,401 no penalty was exigible under s. 271(1)(c) of the IT Act. The orders of the authorities below are set aside. In the result, the appeal is allowed."
5. Though it cannot be laid down as a principle of universal application that whenever an addition is made on a concession, penalty is not to be levied, the factual position in each case has to be considered and the background in which the agreement is made for the addition has to be taken note of, The fact that for the subsequent period deduction has been granted is a relevant factor that has been duly noted by the Tribunal. In the circumstances, we find nothing wrong in the conclusion of the Tribunal cancelling the penalty. The appeal is not entertained. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
