TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (9) TMI 692
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Company engaged in the business of manufacturing and job work in Electronically Engraved Copper Rollers. The return of income was filed on 25.10.2004 declaring income of Rs.15466000/- after claiming deduction U/s. 80 HHC Rs.280208/- and deduction U/s 80 IB of Rs.6608098/- as per prescribed reports obtained from Chartered Accountant as required under respective provisions of the Act. The assessee company claimed factory building repairs expenses of Rs.1903858/- as per audited accounts under the Companies Act and U/S.44AB of IT Act, 1961 as revenue expenditure. During the course of assessment proceedings, the A.O. disallowed the entire factory building repairs expenses of Rs.1903858/- as capital expenditure and allowed depreciation thereon Rs....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ade by the A.O. were confirmed though in part or in full, thus, it is established that assessee had furnished inaccurate particulars of income" and treated the same as furnishing inaccurate particulars of income and levied the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. 3. Being aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter before Ld. CIT(A) who has deleted the penalty by observing as under: "I have carefully considered the penalty order and the submission made by the appellant during the course of appellate proceedings. The A. O. has levied the penalty u/s. 271(l)(c) of the Act as certain disallowances were made in various claims made by the appellant. There were three types of additions / disallowances that were made by the A. O. which are as under....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....me Court in the case of Reliance Petro products Pvt. Ltd reported in 322 ITR 158 is clearly applicable. According to the decision, where there is no finding that any details were supplied by the assessee in its return of income found to be incorrect or erroneous or false there was no question of invoking the penalty under section 271(1)(c). Mere making of claim, which is not sustainable in law, by itself, will not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars regarding the income of the assessee. In these circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that no penalty is exigible on the appellant u/s.271 (1)(c) of the Act. Accordingly, the penalty imposed by the A. O. is deleted and the appeal is allowed." 4. Now, the revenue is before us agai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pellant. The assessee relies on in the case of CIT V/s. Krishna Maruti Limited, Delhi reported in 330 ITR page 547 (Delhi). The A.O. in penalty order U/s. 271(1)(c) dated 28.01 2011 has mentioned that considering the decision of the CIT Appeals and the Hon'ble ITAT. The disallowances made by the A.O were confirmed though in part or in full. Thus it is established that the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of income. The A.O. has further committed an error in mentioning that the finding of the CIT Appeals and the finding of Hon'ble ITAT clearly prove that the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of income. The appellant submits that the CIT Appeals or Hon'ble ITAT have no where mentioned that assessee has furnished inac....