9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (1) TMI 884X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lance-sheet. Thus, the assessee fully and truly disclosed the return of income and, therefore, the charge of furnishing inaccurate particulars of income by the Assessing Officer is not valid. The reliance of decision in case of CIT Vs. Amit Jain [ 2013 (1) TMI 340 - DELHI HIGH COURT ] is very apt in the present case. Therefore, the CIT(A) was not right in dismissing the contentions of the assessee and confirming the partial penalty. Thus, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. - ITA No. 6426/DEL/2019 - - - Dated:- 21-1-2021 - SHRI R. K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Appellant by : Sh. Ankit Gupta, Adv Respondent by : Sh. Ajay Kumar, Sr. DR ORDER PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JM Thi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... interpreted and the same do not justify the penalty imposed U/s 271 (l)(c) at ₹ 4,27,082.00. 7. The addition/disallowance has been made merely on the basis of rejection of explanation of the appellant and no material has been brought on record by the AO in support of said addition/disallowance hence no penalty U/s 271 (1 )(c) could be levied on the basis of such a disallowance. 8. That the CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in non-quashing of penalty proceedings u/s 271(l)(c) which is wrongly initiated by the AO. 9. Penalty proceedings have been initiated without any specific charges hence the same are liable to be set aside. 10. That in any case the penalty imposed is unjust, arbitrary and highly excessive. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... deducted by the Tenant U/s l94I of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee also disclosed the fact, the land belonged to third party as contemplated from the agreement with Dr. Sarita Kalra, and after construction, the assessee company can give the constructed Hospital to Third Party. The Ld. AR further submitted that, the assessee Company has shown the investment in Construction of Hospital as non Current Investment in the Balance Sheet. In view of the above, the assessee has truly and fully disclosed/ reported all the facts and material in its Return of Income, therefore, the charge of furnishing Inaccurate Particulars of Income charged by the assessing officer is arbitrary, unjust and against the facts and circum ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion, the assessee company can give the constructed hospital to third party. The assessee company also disclosed the investment in construction in hospital as non current investment in balance-sheet. Thus, the assessee fully and truly disclosed the return of income and, therefore, the charge of furnishing inaccurate particulars of income by the Assessing Officer is not valid. The reliance of decision in case of CIT Vs. Amit Jain 351, ITR 74 Delhi that of Jurisdictional High Court is very apt in the present case. Therefore, the CIT(A) was not right in dismissing the contentions of the assessee and confirming the partial penalty. Thus, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. 8. In result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pron ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
