Concealment penalty revoked in depreciation disallowance case post Supreme Court decision.

The concealment penalty related to the disallowance of depreciation on assets given under sale and lease back basis was at issue in this case. The Tribunal, after rectifying its previous order following the Supreme Court's decision, allowed the claim for depreciation and withdrew any corresponding benefit given to the assessee. As the disallowance had already been deleted by the Tribunal, it found no justification for the concealment penalty and accordingly deleted it. Consequently, all appeals filed by the assessee were allowed, emphasizing the Tribunal's adherence to the Supreme Court's decision on the matter.

---

---

Issues:
Appeal against concealment penalty related to disallowance of depreciation on assets given under sale and lease back basis for assessment years 1995-96, 1996-97, 1997-98.

Analysis:
The appeals were filed by the assessee against orders passed by the CIT(A) regarding the concealment penalty on disallowance of depreciation for assets given under sale and lease back basis. The grounds of appeal in all the appeals were identical, challenging the levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c). The appellant argued that the CIT(A) erred in upholding the penalty and disregarded the submissions of the appellant and the contentious nature of the issue, which was decided by the Special Bench of ITAT. The Tribunal had earlier sustained the disallowance of depreciation on lease assets, but later rectified its order following the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in a relevant case. The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to allow the claim for depreciation on assets given under sale and lease back basis and withdraw any corresponding benefit given to the assessee. The Tribunal noted that the previous order was contrary to the Supreme Court's decision and rectified it accordingly.

Considering that the disallowance itself had been deleted by the Tribunal in a previous order, the Tribunal found no justification in levying concealment penalty. Therefore, the concealment penalty was deleted, and all the appeals filed by the assessee were allowed. The Tribunal pronounced the order in the open court on a specified date.

In conclusion, the Tribunal's decision revolved around the rectification of its previous order regarding the disallowance of depreciation on assets given under sale and lease back basis. The Tribunal acknowledged the applicability of the Supreme Court's decision in allowing the claim for depreciation in such transactions. As the disallowance had been deleted by the Tribunal previously, the concealment penalty was deemed unjustified and subsequently deleted. The appeals filed by the assessee were allowed based on these considerations.

---