9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (1) TMI 908X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct the last date by which penalty order could have been passed was 30.06.2014. The penalty order was passed on 14.07.2016. Therefore, the penalty order dated 14.07.2016 was time barred. Assessment order dated 20.03.2013 mentions Penalty proceedings u/s 271C(1)(a) of the Act is initiated separately for non-compliance to the provision of section 192(1) of the Act . Penalty order dated 14.07.2016 refers to section 194C/194J/and Annexure G of Tax Audit Report. The reference is completely erroneous. No contractual/professional payments are mentioned in P L Account. The incorrect facts and figures show non-application of mind. Appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. - Shri Vimal Kumar, Judicial Member And Shri Naveen Chandra, Accountant Membe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rred in not appreciating that the learned AO was merely a recommending authority and the limitation period for imposition of penalty starts from the date of issue of show-cause notice by learned JCIT/Addl.CIT(TDS). Learned CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition made on account of exemption claimed i.e. Rs. 36,66,75,500/- under section 2(14) of the Act. As the land was not agricultural land on date of sale. The characterization of property will not freeze on the basis of an event but depend on the circumstances existing at the time of sale of property. Learned CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition made by AO on account of loss on capital asset of Rs. 4,00,00,000/-, which was confirmed by the CIT(A) against order of 143(3) of the Act. As the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... roducts (P.) Ltd. reported in [2017] 82 taxmann.com 39 (Delhi)- Delhi High Court ii. PCIT vs. JKD Capital Finlease Ltd. [2015] 378 ITR 614 Delhi High Court iii. PCIT vs. Rishikesh Buildcon (P.) Ltd. [2023] 451 ITR 108 Delhi High Court 6.1 In the Assessment Order penalty under section 271C of the Act was initiated for non-compliance of section 192(1). Penalty levied for TDS non-compliance of contractual payments. No contractual payments in P L account and the total expenditures debited in P L account is Rs. 5,43,78,655/-. Under clause 27(b) of Tax Audit Report, no TDS non-compliance reported. There is no Annexure G of Tax Audit Report. Reference to Annexure G is erroneous. No TDS non-compliance addition was made in the assessment u/s 143(3) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ated 14.07.2016 was time barred. 7.3 Moreover, assessment order dated 20.03.2013 mentions Penalty proceedings u/s 271C(1)(a) of the Act is initiated separately for non-compliance to the provision of section 192(1) of the Act . 7.4 Penalty order dated 14.07.2016 refers to section 194C/194J/and Annexure G of Tax Audit Report. The reference is completely erroneous. No contractual/professional payments are mentioned in P L Account. The incorrect facts and figures show non-application of mind. 7.5 In the above material facts apparent on record, the submissions made by learned Departmental Representative and grounds of appeal being devoid of merit are dismissed. 8. In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced on this ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
