2014 (11) TMI 106 - HC - Income Tax

Court upholds penalty deletion for disallowed depreciation, no concealment found for assessment year 2001-02

The Court upheld the deletion of penalty based on the disallowance of depreciation for the assessment year 2001-02, related to lease transactions from ... Disallowance of depreciation – Genuineness of transactions - Held that:- The Commissioner as well as the Tribunal found that there is no concealment of particulars of income nor furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income for the assessment year – there was no merit in the contention of the revenue - there was no concealment nor the particulars have been termed as inaccurate and for the subject AY - It is on these findings that the penalty has been deleted – the order of the Tribunal is upheld – Decided against revenue. Issues:1. Deletion of penalty based on disallowance of depreciation.2. Claim of concealment of income particulars.3. Validity of Tribunal's decision on penalty deletion.Analysis:1. The judgment addresses the issue of deletion of penalty concerning the disallowance of depreciation made by the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 2001-02, related to lease transactions from 1995-96. The Commissioner and Tribunal found no concealment of income particulars, leading to the penalty deletion.2. The appellant argued that despite approaching the Settlement Commission in previous years, the Assessee persisted with the claim in the present assessment year. The Tribunal's failure to provide independent reasons for endorsing the Commissioner's findings was contested as a substantial question of law. However, the Court dismissed this contention, emphasizing that all relevant particulars were available to the department, with no concealment or inaccuracies noted for the subject assessment year.3. The Court concluded that the Tribunal's decision to delete the penalty was based on the availability of all necessary particulars to the Revenue, with no concealment or inaccuracies found. The Tribunal's order was deemed not perverse or vitiated by any legal errors apparent on record. The judgment upheld the penalty deletion, dismissing the appeal and not awarding any costs.