TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (9) TMI 1360
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aw"- "1. Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble ITAT was legally justified in deleting the penalty of Rs. 10,84,050/- imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act without appreciating that the disallowance under Section 80IB was made by the Assessing Officer not because of any difference of opinion but because such deduction was not available to the assessee by virtue of specific provision of law and therefore the claim of deduction made by the assessee amounted to furnishing inaccurate particulars of income attracting penal provisions under section 271(1)(c)? 2. Whether or not the findings have been recorded by ITAT on misreading and misinterpretation of facts and evidence emanating on record? 3. Whethe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f income to the tune of Rs. 29,62,491/-. Therefore, the Assessing Officer imposed penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act at the rate of 100% of the tax sought to be evaded which came to Rs. 10,84,050/-. Aggrieved by the order, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). Vide order dated 25.9.2013, Annexure A.2, the appeal was allowed on the ground that it was bonafide belief of the assessee that it was a small scale industry in view of various notifications of the Ministry of Industry. It was further held that the assessee had stated all the particulars of plant and machinery as well as calculation of deduction under Section 80IB of the Act in the return of income and thus it could not be said to be concealment of income or furnishing ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the submission of the assessee as well as the impugned order. I have also gone through the plethora of cases relied upon by the assessee. The learned Assessing Officer had initiated the penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) as it has been held that the assessee has filed inaccurate particulars and so concealed his income to the extent of Rs. 29,62,491/- in as much as the claim for deduction under Section 80IB(3) on the ground of it being a small scale undertaking was false. As per section 271(1)(c), penalty is to be levied if the assessee has concealed particulars of income or has furnished inaccurate particulars of such income. Assessee has contended that the penalty was not sustainable as the charge contemplated under section 271(1....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....facts as regards its investment cannot be said to have been withheld by the assessee as the return filed was accompanied by audited accounts and Form 1OCCB. Consequently considering the facts of the case, I am inclined to hold that the assessee had fully disclosed all material facts and so it is apparent that there is neither any concealment of income nor furnishing of inaccurate particulars of its income. The penalty levied is therefore directed to be deleted." 7. The said findings were affirmed by the Tribunal vide order dated 18.11.2014, Annexure A.3 as under- "9. We have considered rival submissions and material available on record and do not find any justification to interfere with the order of the learned CIT(Appeals) in cancell....