9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 396X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The assessee had claimed bad debts deduction which stood disallowed in quantum proceedings being in the nature of an “NPA” provision only. It therefore appears a case of pure disallowance simplicitor on account of failure in fulfilling the mandatory condition and not an instance of concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. The CIT(A) has taken into consideration all the relevant facts and circumstance to conclude that assessee’s impugned claim does not attract either of the two limbs u/s 271(1)(c). - decided against revenue. - ITA No.576/Kol/2017 - - - Dated:- 30-11-2018 - Shri S.S.Godara, Judicial Member And Shri, M. Balaganesh, Accountant Member For the Appellant : Shri Saurbh Kumar, Addl. CIT-SR-DR For ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be evaded was imposed by the A.O. The appellant's A.R. had mainly contended through the written submission that the appellant had filed the appeal before the CIT(A), against the quantum addition made by the A.O. through the appellate order no.1066/CIT(A)-1/C- 3(2) P.B./2014-15, for A.Y.2012-13, the addition of ₹ 1,82,24,646/- was deleted by relying on the decision of the ITAT, of Chennai, co-operative bank Ltd. in ITA No., 1961 no. 948/2013 dated 21.01.2014 where in it was held that if the assessee had created provision of bad doubtful debts under nomenclature this entitled the assessee Under Section 36(viia). The appellant's A.R. had argued that it had furnished the complete particulars in the return of income dur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y holding in .. para 62 that finding in assessment proceedings cannot automatically be adopted in penalty proceedings and the authorities have to consider the matter afresh from different angle. In view of the above discussion, it is found that on merits of the issue in dispute i.e. disallowance of provision for NPA, held by the A.O. as not allowable as bad debts Under Section 36(viia) of the Act. The issue involved was a debatable issue on which more than one view was possible and taken by the A.O, who adopted a different opinion. The appellant's claim was thus not in the nature of a false claim or could be said to tantamount to furnishing of incorrect particulars of income. Considering the factual position that the appellant had ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Assessing Officer held in his order dated 26.08.2015 that the assessee had furnished inaccurate particulars of income as well as concealed its taxable income to the extent of its sec. 36(1)(viia) claim amount of ₹ 1,82,24,646/-. The CIT(A) has accepted assessee s arguments hereinabove challenging correctness thereof during the course of lower appellate proceedings. 6. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the rival Revenue s grievance. Case file perused. We make it clear first of all that hon'ble apex court s landmark decision in CIT vs. Reliance Petroproducts Pvt Ltd . (2010) 322 ITR 158 (SC) held long back that quantum and penalty proceedings are parallel in nature wherein each and every disallowance / addition ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
