2015 (6) TMI 811

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....roposed substantial question of law "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ITAT was correct in law in deleting penalty of Rs. 62,55,500/-levied u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act without appreciating the fact that claiming speculation loss as business loss deliberately amount to filing of inaccurate particulars and adjusting the same against income from other sources, whereas the clause (d) inserted by the Finance Act, 2005 under sub-section (5) of section 43 is applicable w.e.f 01.04.2006 i.e. from A.Y. 2006-07 conclusively proves that the derivative transactions are in the nature of speculative transactions till A.Y. 2005-06?" 2. That the assessee filed his return of income for the year in consideration declari....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s Tribunals at the relevant time. 2.2 Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order passed by the learned CIT(A) deleting the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Act, the Revenue preferred appeal before the learned ITAT and by impugned judgment and order the learned ITAT has dismissed the said appeal preferred by the Revenue confirming the deletion of the penalty. 2.3 Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and order passed by the learned ITAT in deleting the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Act, the Revenue has preferred the present Tax Appeal to consider the aforesaid proposed substantial question of law. 3. Shri Parikh, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant has vehemently submi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Reliance Petroproducts (P.) Ltd. [2010] 322 ITR 158 when the learned CIT(A) has deleted the penalty which has been confirmed by the learned Tribunal by passing the impugned order, no error has been committed in deleting the penalty. While deleting the penalty in para 4.3, the learned CIT(A) has observed and held as under: "4.3 I have given my careful consideration to the facts of the case as well as the observation of the AO and the arguments put forth by the AR. I am in agreement with the AR of the appellant that it is not a case of filing inaccurate particulars of income by the appellant. All particulars in respect of the loss were found to be correct. Only point of contention was that ....