2024 (5) TMI 293

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. The case laws cited above duly supports the case of the assessee [MSK CONSTRUCTIONS P. LTD. [ 2007 (3) TMI 181 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] and RELIANCE PETROPRODUCTS PVT. LTD. [ 2010 (3) TMI 80 - SUPREME COURT] . Furthermore, the conduct of the assessee is not contumacious. Accordingly, relying on the precedent as above, we delete the penalty. Appeal filed by the assessee is .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nt as per decision of CIT vs. Reliance Petro Products 322 ITR 158 (SC). 4. Because addition made U/S 40(A)(3) are deeming provision and it may not be extended to the penalty proceedings. 5. Because even otherwise here is no adverse finding whatsoever regarding disallowance of business expenses incurred by the A except invoking provision sec 40(A)(3) of the Income Tax Act while making addition of c .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... adras High Court in the case of CIT vs. MSK Constructions (P) Ltd. (2008) 296 ITR 18 (Madras) for the following proposition :- In the instant case, the Tribunal after going through the records observed that the disallowance of interest under section 43B of the Act does not amount to concealment of income and that when there is no tax payable, penalty could not be levied. We, therefore, find no ill .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X