TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (4) TMI 640
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... dated 29.12.2010 for the assessment year 2005-06. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: "1. That the order of the ld. CIT(A) sustaining the penalty under section 271(1)(c) levied by the AO is against law & facts of the case. 2. That on the facts & circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding the penalty ignoring that the claim of depreciation was made as mentioned ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Road, Artni, Agra on 30th March, 2005 and had claimed depreciation on the said car amounting to Rs.81,675/-. When asked to justify the claim of depreciation, the assessee submitted before the AO that the car was purchased by it on 30th March, 2005 as per the sale invoice of the same date. It was also contended vide letter dated 05.11.2007 that the car was used by the assessee for business purpose....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... depreciation was claimed under the genuine and bonafide belief that since the amount was paid and debited in the Profit & Loss account, hence the assessee was not liable for any penalty. The AO was not satisfied with the explanation noting that the assessee had claimed during the assessment proceedings that the car was used in the relevant previous year whereas it was not used and that the claim ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng the assessment proceedings as well as in the penalty proceedings. It is not a case that this mistake has been pointed out by the AO in the assessment proceedings. During the assessment proceedings, the assessee had voluntarily come forward and pointed out the mistake to rectify the same. The assessee was under the bonafide belief and has not concealed any particulars of income, even if, such de....