9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (6) TMI 120X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ied of Rs. 2,86,97,054/- levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Act passed by the learned Assessing Officer on 30th March, 2019 was deleted. 2. The learned Assessing Officer has raised the following grounds of appeal:- "(i) Whether on the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the penalty of Rs. 2,86,97,054/- levied u/s. 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 without appreciating that the fact that the assessee had furnished inaccurate particulars of its income for the instant Assessment Year thereby concealing its true income. (ii) Whether on the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the penalty of Rs. 2,86,97,054/- levied u/s. 271(1)(c) of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Cochin Unit of Rs. 85,98,116/-. The assessee preferred the appeal before the learned CIT(A), who confirmed the disallowance under Section 10A of the Act of Rs. 5,92,02,308/- instead of claim of Rs. 13,69,95,563/-. He also confirmed the addition of Rs. 85,98,116/- on option premium loss allocated to SEZ unit. Based on this, the penalty proceedings originally initiated was put into action. The assessee submitted a letter dated 11th March, 2019 stating that disallowance under Section 10A of the Act was made on ad hoc basis and there is no concealment of income. Meanwhile, the order of learned CIT(A) in quantum proceedings was challenged before the coordinate Bench in ITA no. 4548/Mum/2017. This appeal was decided as per the order dated 14th Ju ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... does not stand and directed to be deleted." 4. Thus, penalty was deleted by the learned CIT(A). 5. The learned Assessing Officer is aggrieved with that of the order is in appeal. 6. Supporting the order of the learned Assessing Officer, the Departmental Representative submitted that the decision of the ITAT has been challenged by the Revenue before the Hon'ble High court with respect to the deduction under Section 10AA of the Act. Further, with respect to the second disallowance on allocation of loss premium, it was submitted that ITAT has set aside the order to the file of the learned Assessing Officer for deciding afresh and therefore, the penalty could not have been deleted on the above sum. 7. The learned Authorized Representati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... remanded the matter back to the file of the learned Assessing Officer. Therefore, when the particular addition has been restored back to the file of the learned Assessing Officer, the power of the learned Assessing Officer for initiation of penalty proceedings, if in set aside proceedings, the learned Assessing Officer is satisfied that there is concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income to initiate the penalty. However, at the present stage there is no infirmity in the order of the learned CIT(A). Hence, we uphold the order of the learned CIT(A) deleting the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. Accordingly, the order of the learned Assessing Officer is dismissed. 9. In the result, the order of the lear ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
