2018 (12) TMI 1585

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e on the issue of depreciation. Thus, there was no concealment of income or inaccurate furnishing of particulars on part of the assessee. The case law relied upon by the Ld. DR is not applicable in the present case as in that case the assessee did not disclose the details of the creditors nor their list but merely claimed in the return. In the present assessee’s case the assessee claimed the d .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has erred in law as well as in facts by sustaining the penalty order u/s 271(1) (c) of the Assessing Officer . 3. Assessment in this case was completed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 26/3/2013 at an income of ₹ 1,92,93,079/- against the return income of ₹ 1,04,46,937/-. During the assessment proceedings the following additions/disallowances w .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of income and furnishing of inaccurate particulars. The assessee made submissions before the Assessing Officer. After considering the submissions of the assessee, the Assessing Officer imposed penalty of ₹ 1,75,200/-. 4. Being aggrieved by the penalty order, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT (A). The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 5. The Ld. AR submitted that duri .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... lding shown as composite figure and depreciation in that regard was inadvertently claimed which was allowed for the past years without reducing value of land does not amount to concealment of income. The Ld. AR further submitted that in similar circumstances in earlier Assessment Year, the revenue has allowed this depreciation. 6. The Ld. DR relied upon the order of the Assessing Officer passed .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ssessee s case the assessee claimed the depreciation after filing the details and there was no concealment or inaccurate furnishing of documents as the issue is allowed in respect of depreciation claimed for land and building. Therefore, Section 271(1)(c) will not be attracted in the present case. The order of the CIT(A) is set aside and appeal of the assessee is allowed. 8. In the result, the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X