9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (1) TMI 40X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the hon ble Apex court s landmark decision in CIT Vs. Reliance Petro Products [ 2010 (3) TMI 80 - SUPREME COURT] has settled the law long back that quantum and penalty proceedings are parallel in nature wherein each and every disallowance/addition made in the course of the former does not ipso facto attracts the latter provision. Hon ble jurisdictional high court s decision in PCIT Vs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Accountant Member For the Assessee : Shri Kishor Phadke For the Revenue : Shri Keyur Patel, CIT And Shri M.G. Jasnani ORDER PER BENCH : These assessee s four appeals for assessment years 2006-09 to 2009-10, arise against the Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune-11 s separate Din and Order Nos.ITBA/APL/S/250/2021-22/1039762278(1), ITBA/APL/S/250/2021-2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aised for the first time in section 153A assessments completed in furtherance to the search in issue dated 25-08-2011. Both the learned lower authorities admittedly hold that the said identical quantum disallowance indeed attracts the impugned penalty provision. This leaves the assessee aggrieved. 3. Mr. Jasnani at the outset filed before us this tribunal s common quantum order dated 23-03-2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessee has stated to have been pursuing its remedy before the hon ble higher judicial forums. 4. Mr. Jasnani at this stage vehemently argued that the assessee s act and conduct in raising the impugned section 80IA deduction claim in section 153A assessment proceedings itself forms a sufficient reason to hold that it has concealed and furnished inaccurate particulars of its taxable income . ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... make it clear that we are dealing with penalty proceedings only. We thus conclude that both the lower authorities have erred in law and on facts in imposing these penalties in the impugned four assessment years before us. The same are directed to be deleted. The assessee succeeds in its instant identical sole substantive grievance therefore. 6. Delay of 13 days in filing of all these four appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
