2009 (11) TMI 954 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal overturns penalty for deduction claim, citing genuine difference of opinion

Baldev Woollen International Versus Income Tax Officer

The Tribunal allowed the appeal by the assessee against the order of the CIT(A) regarding the levy of penalty under s. 271(1)(c) for claiming deduction ... - Issues involved: Appeal against order of CIT(A) for assessment year 2001-02 regarding levy of penalty under s. 271(1)(c) for claiming deduction under s. 80-IB on duty drawback/DEPB.Summary:Issue 1: Validity of CIT(A) orderThe appeal challenged the order of CIT(A) on grounds of law and facts, contending that penalty under s. 271(1)(c) was wrongly confirmed.Issue 2: Allowability of deduction under s. 80-IBAssessee claimed deduction under s. 80-IB on duty drawback/DEPB, which was disallowed by AO leading to penalty initiation and confirmation by CIT(A).Issue 3: Debatability of claimAssessee argued that the claim for deduction on export incentive was debatable, citing conflicting decisions. Delhi Benches held that penalty under s. 271(1)(c) was not applicable for such claims.Issue 4: Judicial interpretationsWhile AO and CIT(A) upheld the penalty, Supreme Court and High Court decisions were cited to support the disallowance of deduction on export incentives.Judgment:The Tribunal considered the debate surrounding the claim for deduction under s. 80-IB on duty drawback/DEPB. Despite conflicting decisions, the Tribunal noted that the claim was not baseless and was made bona fide. The Tribunal highlighted that the claim was supported by various court decisions, indicating a genuine difference of opinion. As no evidence of incorrect particulars was presented by the Department, the Tribunal concluded that the penalty under s. 271(1)(c) was not justified. Consequently, the penalty was deleted, and the appeal by the assessee was allowed.