9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (2) TMI 128X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... contended vehemently the findings of the AO that the size of the land is less than one acre. Therefore, the ratio of the decision of Hon ble Apex Court in the case of Reliance Petroproducts Ltd.[ 2010 (3) TMI 80 - SUPREME COURT] is squarely applicable to the facts in the present case. It is not a fit case for levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income - it is not a fit case for levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No.452/PUN/2016 - - - Dated:- 29-1-2021 - Shri Inturi Rama Rao, AM And Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, JM For the Assessee : Shri S.N. Puranik. For the Revenue : Shri Sudhendu Das. ORDER PER INTURI RAMA RAO, AM: This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) 2, (hereinafter called as CIT(A) for short) dated 30.11.2015 confirming the levy of penalty under Sec.271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2007-08. 2. The appellant has raised the following grounds of appeal. 1. Hon ble Commissioner of Income ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... refore, the AO had proceeded with the matter by holding the appellant was guilty of furnishing of inaccurate particulars by placing reliance on the decision of Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case CIT Vs. Escorts Finance Limited reported in (2008) 292 ITR 658 levied penalty of ₹ 1,63,43,480/- vide order dated 21.12.2012. 5. Being aggrieved by the levy of penalty, the appellant had preferred appeal before Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) contending that mere disallowance of claim for deduction does not tantamount to furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income placing reliance on the decisions of ITAT Pune Bench in the case of M/s. Chandrai Constructions and in the case of Rohan Engg. Constructions. However, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) held that the claim made by the assessee is a wrong claim placing reliance on the decision of Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Escorts Finance Pvt. Ltd., (supra) and the decision of Hon ble Madras High Court in the case of Coromandel Indag Products Pvt. Ltd., reported in 265 ITR 611, had confirmed the levy of penalty. 6. Being aggrieved by the decision of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), the appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pears that the AO had concluded that the size of the land is less than one acre based on the entries in 7/12 extract. It is also a matter of fact that the actual area is more than one acre i.e., 4722 sq.mtrs, which is more than the area mentioned in 7/12 extract. Considering these facts, the Tribunal had allowed the appeal in ITA No.1052/PUN/2011 and had clearly held the entries made in 7/12 extract are not conclusive and what is to be considered is the actual area of the plot and accordingly, allowed the appeal of the assessee in the quantum appeal. Thus, since the addition made in the assessment was deleted in the quantum appeal, no penalty can be levied. 10. Even otherwise, from the perusal of the assessment order, we find that the penalty proceedings u/s 273 r.w.s 271(1)(c) of the Act were initiated by the AO on the allegation that the appellant had furnished inaccurate particulars of income. From the perusal of the assessment order as well as the penalty order passed u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act, there is no finding by the AO as to how and in what manner, the assessee had furnished the inaccurate particulars of income leading to addition, to the returned income of the assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o the inaccurate particulars. 10. It was tried to be suggested that s. 14A of the Act specifically excluded the deductions in respect of the expenditure incurred by the assessee in relation to income which does not form part of the total income under the Act. It was further pointed out that the dividends from the shares did not form the part of the total income. It was, therefore, reiterated before us that the AO had correctly reached the conclusion that since the assessee had claimed excessive deductions knowing that they are incorrect; it amounted to concealment of income. It was tried to be argued that the falsehood in accounts can take either of the two forms; (i) an item of receipt may be suppressed fraudulently; (ii) an item of expenditure may be falsely (or in an exaggerated amount) claimed, and both types attempt to reduce the taxable income and, therefore, both types amount to concealment of particulars of one's income as well as furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. We do not agree, as the assessee had furnished all the details of its expenditure as well as income in its return, which details, in themselves, were not found to be inaccurate nor could be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
