TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (10) TMI 1482
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., JM. This appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-I, Coimbatore dated 4.6.2014 for the assessment year 2008-09. The only grievance of the Revenue in its appeal is that Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in deleting the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. 2. Brief facts are that assessee received subsidy from the Govern....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t allowing any set off against the expenditure incurred by the assessee. On further appeal, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) confirmed the assessment. The Assessing Officer initiated penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act and in reply to the show cause notice, assessee submitted that assessee has not concealed income or furnished inaccurate particulars and its claim was bas....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sources. 4. Counsel for the assessee strongly supports the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in deleting the penalty and submits that there is no concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income and the claim was made based on the judicial pronouncements. 5. Heard both the sides. Perused orders of lower authorities. The Assessing Officer levied penalty holding ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ushashi Autoparts India Pvt. Ltd. (330 ITR 545) held as under:- "In the case where assessee computed the preoperative expenses after deducting interest and showing in balance sheet filed along with return of income and Assessing Officer holding that interest cannot be adjusted against pre-operative expenses does not mean that there was any non-disclosure of material fact, which could warrant levy....