2013 (4) TMI 154

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Respondent : Mr. Nikhil Rajani i/b. V. Deshpande & Co JUDGEMENT 1. In this appeal by the revenue for the assessment year 2003-04, following questions of law have been raised for our consideration :- A. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in deleting the penalty levied by the assessing officer u/s.271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he respondent-assessee realised that it had wrongly claimed Rs.1.70 crores of depreciation instead of Rs.1.05 crores. This excess claim for depreciation had happened due to a mistake in calculation i.e. Instead of reducing the amount the amount of Rs.32.51 lakhs from Rs.1.38 crores, the amount of Rs.32.51 lakhs was added to Rs.1.38 lakhs resulting in claim for depreciation at Rs.1.70 crores. The A....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... bonafide mistake on the part of the respondent-assessee. In that view of the matter, imposition of penalty was not warranted. (iv) Since the order of the Tribunal on the above issue is based on a finding of fact, we see no reason to entertain question A. 3. Regarding question B: (i) The respondent-assessee had during the assessment year sold its garment manufacturing machine and claimed ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t loss in the computation of the total income. Thus, there was complete disclosure. The Tribunal further records that the above loss was claimed by the respondent-assessee as a revenue expenditure as the Chartered Accountant did not advice them correctly as to the legal position. However, during the assessment proceedings, the mistake was noticed and corrected by the respondent-assessee. On the ab....