TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (2) TMI 669
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nafter referred to as "the Tribunal") for the assessment year 2007-08, claiming the following substantial questions of law : "(a) Whether the hon'ble Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is justified in law in deleting the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act imposed by the Assessing Officer as the assessee filed the return of income without computing the correct tax liability under section 115JB read with section 10(38) of the Act and, thus, failed in disclosing the true and correct tax liability under section 115JB of the Act ; the hon'ble Income-tax Appellate Tribunal failed to appreciate the fact that the assessee-company filed a revised computation of in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the assessment proceedings, the assessee filed a revised computation of income and Form No. 29B on December 4, 2009. The book profit of the assessee was computed at Rs. 4,77,25,617 and the tax liability under section 115JB of the Act was computed at Rs. 47,72,562 (10 per cent. of the book profit). The Assessing Officer, vide order dated December 18, 2009 (annexure A-I) framed assessment and initiated penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. The assessee did not challenge the assessment order in appeal. Thereafter, a penalty of Rs. 13,58,452 was imposed upon the assessee, vide order dated June 28, 2010 (annexure A- II). Feeling aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) (for brevit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... relevant for the assessment year in question. It was under a bona fide belief, unaware of the amendment whereby a proviso was inserted, the long-term capital gains on the shares was not taken into consideration while determining the book profits under section 115JB of the Act. It was stoutly argued that the Tribunal has rightly placed reliance upon Reliance Petroproducts Ltd.'s case (supra) and deleted the penalty. 5. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, we find considerable force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respondent. The Tribunal, while deleting the penalty, had noticed as under : "4. Having gone through the orders of the au....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... [2008] 302 ITR 43 (P&H). The explanation of the assessee before the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) remained that the proviso to section 10(38) of the Act was inserted with effect from April 1, 2007, and prior to that long-term capital gains on shares was not to be considered for applicability of MAT provisions. When this amendment came to the knowledge of the assessee, it immediately obtained the auditors report in Form No. 29B and filed the same along with the revised computation of income. It was accordingly argued that the assessee had neither concealed the particulars of income nor furnished inaccu rate particulars of income so as to attract the provisions of section 271(1)(c) of the Act. We do not have any reason to doub....