9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (6) TMI 307X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt : Shri Manpreet Duggal, DR For the Respondent : None ORDER PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM: The appeal is filed by the revenue against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) -4 Mumbai, passed u/s.271(1)(c) and 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The revenue has raised the sole ground of appeal: 1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the penal ty of ₹ 57,30,000/- levied on the additions made on account of (a) Advance received from Nopany Sons Pvt l td., u/s 68 of the Act amounting to ₹ 1,50,00,000/-; (b) Addition on account of cessation of liability amounting to ₹ 13,33,365/-; (c) Addition on account of debit balanc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ions of Sec. 271(1)(c) explanation (1) of the Act and levied the penalty of ₹ 57,30,000/-and passed the order u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. 3. Aggrieved by the penalty order, the assessee has filed an appeal before the CIT(A). Whereas, CIT(A) considered the grounds of appeal, submissions of the assessee and findings of the A.O has dealt on the disputed issue and find that in respect of additions made by the A.O.the Honble Tribunal has granted relief to the assessee. The CIT(A) observed that when the additions have been deleted by the Hon ble Tribunal, hence no penalty can be sustained and deleted the penalty and allowed the assessee appeal. Aggrieved by the order, the revenue has filed an appeal with the Honble Tribunal. 4. At the t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s advanced against purchase of shares. Hence, we find that the entire truncation of advance of ₹ 1.50 Crores is explained and cannot be added under section 68 of the Act. Accordingly, we delete the addition and allow this issue of assessee appeal. 22. We have heard rival contentions and gone through the facts and in cur stances of the case. We find that the AO noted from the accounts of the assessee that there is liability outstanding in the books of the assessee for an amount of ₹ 10,47,914/- in the name of Filmkraft Pvt. Ltd. and another amount of ₹ 2,85,444/- in the name of Entertainment One. The AO require the assessee to confirm these liabilities from these parties but the assessee only enclosed the ledger accoun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s and gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. Now, during the course of hearing before us, the learned Counsel for the assessee drew our attention to the assessee s paper book at pages 22 to 24, wherein the details of sundry balances written off is enclosed. The learned Counsel for the assessee explained that the assessee is a major film producer and director. He explained that in the course of his business, various debit and credit balances remain in the accounts. The same are periodically written off. In the accounts for the AY 2011-12 under appeal, debit balances of ₹ 22,02,150/- and credit balances of ₹ 18,05,204/- were written off resulting in the write off of net debit balances of ₹ 3,96,946/-. The deta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
