TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>ITAT Upholds CIT(A)'s Decision to Cancel Penalties for Assessment Years 2004-05 and 2005-06</h1> <h3>Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax Versus Orissa State Police Housing & Welfare Corporation Ltd.</h3> Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax Versus Orissa State Police Housing & Welfare Corporation Ltd. - TMI Issues:Appeals by revenue against CIT(A) orders canceling penalties u/s. 271(1)(b) and 271(1)(c) for AYs 2004-05 and 2005-06.Analysis:1. The revenue filed appeals against CIT(A) orders canceling penalties u/s. 271(1)(b) and 271(1)(c) for the assessment years 2004-05 and 2005-06. The assessee filed Cross Objections supporting the CIT(A) orders.2. Regarding penalty u/s. 271(1)(b), the revenue argued non-cooperation by the assessee in filing returns in response to notice u/s. 148. The CIT(A) canceled the penalty citing reasonable cause under section 273B. The AR supported the CIT(A)'s decision.3. The ITAT noted that the AO did not refute the assessee's claim of filing original returns based on provisional accounts due to audit delays. The CIT(A) considered the circumstances, including the higher income declared in response to the notice u/s. 148, accepted by the AO. The penalty cancellation was upheld based on reasonable cause.4. For penalty u/s. 271(1)(c), the revenue argued a significant difference between original and revised returns post notice u/s. 148. The CIT(A) canceled the penalty invoking section 273B, disputed by the revenue. The AR contended that the higher income was voluntarily disclosed.5. The ITAT found that the CIT(A) correctly applied section 273B for both penalties. The assessee disclosed true income post CAG audit, paid taxes, and filed returns before knowing the audit results. The AO accepted the revised income without changes, supporting the assessee's explanation.6. The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to cancel penalties u/s. 271(1)(c) based on reasonable cause and accepted income variations. The Cross Objections supporting CIT(A) were upheld, rendering the revenue's appeals and Cross Objections infructuous.This detailed analysis covers the issues of penalty cancellation under sections 271(1)(b) and 271(1)(c) for the mentioned assessment years, highlighting the arguments, decisions, and reasoning provided by the parties and the tribunal.
TaxTMI 