9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 2745X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s directed against the order dated 12.06.2014 passed by the ld. CIT(A) confirming penalty of Rs. 4,06,009/- imposed by the Assessing Officer u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 in relation to assessment year 2008-09. 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee claimed deduction in respect of certain payments made to M/s Maersk India Pvt.Ltd. The Assessing Officer observed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... basis of a Circular, as per which, the foreign shipping companies and their agents were governed by the provisions of Section 172 and not by Section 194C of the Act. Though it is an admitted fact that the assessee made the payment to a resident but the fact remains that principal of M/s Maersk India Pvt. Ltd., being M/s A.P. Moller-Maersk A/S, Denmark, was given 100% DIT relief, copy of which let ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r which disallowance has been made u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act. Under no circumstance can such a disallowance be brought within the ambit of Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. The assessee made a proper disclosure about the expense claimed by it as deduction which was neither bogus nor otherwise non-deductible but for the application of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. Overturning the impugned order, I order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
