9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (8) TMI 1633X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er section 271(l)(c) of the Act. It is submitted that the appellant had furnished full and correct particulars of its income. The appellant has neither concealed the particulars of its income nor have furnished inaccurate particulars of such income and therefore no penalty can be levied under section 271(l)(c) of the Income tax Act, 1961. The Penalty order is hasty, bad in law and ought to be cancelled." 2. The brief facts of the case are that assessee filed return of income for A.Y. 2012-13 on 29-09-2012 declaring income of Rs. 58,03,580/-. During the assessment proceedings, the AO noted that assessee has debited an amount of Rs. 2,52,152/- under the head 'loss on sale of fixed assets'(motor car). The AO asked the assessee to explain ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mental representatives ( Ld. DR) for the revenue and perused the material available on record. The Ld.AR of the assessee submits that due to inadvertent mistake the assessee debited an amount of Rs. 2,52,152/- on sale of fixed asset. Soon after it was realised during the assessment proceedings, the assessee voluntarily offered the same for assessment. There was a very minor claim of prior period expenses. The assessee also agreed for disallowance of such prior period expenses of Rs. 600/-. There was no intentional or deliberate action on the part of assessee for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income or concealment of income. The Ld.AR of the assessee submits that assessee himself accepted the unintentional mistake. In the reply to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rs Pvt Ltd (PWC) vs CIT (supra) held that when the assessee due to bonafide and inadvertent error, the assessee while submitting its return, failed to add the provision of gratuity to its total income, the assessee should have been careful but the absence of due care in a case such as present one did not mean that assessee was guilty of either furnishing inaccurate particulars or attempting to conceal the income. 6. In our considered view, the ratio of the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Price Water Coopers Pvt Ltd (PWC) Vs CIT (supra)) is squarely applicable on the facts of the present case. Therefore, considering the peculiarity of facts of the case, we are of the considered view that no penalty was leviable on such facts and circum ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
